Skip to main content

Full text of "Introduction to the study of history : civil, ecclesiastical, and literary"

See other formats


INTRODUCTION 



TO 



THE STUDY OF HISTORY. 



INTRODUCTION 



TO 



THE STUDY OF HISTORY 



Civil, Ecclesiastical, and Literary. 



BY W. B. BOYCE. 



LONDON : 

for tfje lutfjor 6g 
THEOPHILUS WOOLMER, 

2, CASTLE STREET, CITY ROAD, & 66, PATERNOSTER ROW. 

1884. 



WYMAN AND SONS, PRINTERS, 

GREAT QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN's-INN FIELDS, 
LONDON, \V.C. 




D 



TO 

SIR GEORGE WIGRAM ALLEN, K.C.M.G. 

Toxtclh Park, Sydney, New South Wales, 
THIS VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED, 

BY 
HIS OWN AND HIS FATHER'S FRIEND, 

WILLIAM B. BOYCE. 



PREFACE. 



THE links between the most remote past and the present are 
comparatively few. They are to be found in the histories of 
the ISRAELITES, the GREEKS, the ROMANS, and in that of one's own 
country, be it England, or France, or Germany. The ISRAELITISH 
history (that of the Bible) introduces us to that of BABYLON, 
ASSYRIA, EGYPT, and PERSIA. GREEK history brings us to the very 
beginning of European civilisation, and of free democratical govern- 
ments. ROMAN history is the history of struggles for a mixed free 
constitutional government, with encouraging success, which failed 
only through the wars of conquest that led to the necessary esta- 
blishment of the Empire. The history of our own country, or that 
of France or Germany, is more or less connected with that of the 
civilised world. In the excellent Students' Manuals published by 
Murray there is a complete historical library compiled by writers of 
eminence, and well adapted for the present use or future reference 
of the reader, as introductory to the study of our great historians. 

2. In the present work an attempt is made to exhibit the leading 
events in the history of the world contemporaneously (as far as is 
possible with due regard to chronological order). For the con- 
venience of the student, the narrative is arranged in thirteen periods. 
At the conclusion of each of these periods there is a brief retrospec- 
tive review of the position and relative importance of the leading 
political organisations and of the then state of the world. The 
first period closes with the tenth century B.C. ; the second with the 
foundation of the Persian Empire by Cyrus, 539 B.C. ; the third with 
the empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. ; the fourth with the 
Roman Empire under Augustus, and the Christian era ; the fifth 
with the final division of the Roman Empire, 395 A.D. ; the sixth 
to the revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne, 800 A.D. ; 



viii Introduction to the Study of History. 

the seventh to the Crusades, 1096 A.D. ; the eighth closes with the 
reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. ; the ninth with the age 
of the Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. ; the tenth with 
the English Revolution of 1688 A.D. ; the eleventh with the French 
Revolution of 1788 A.D. ; the twelfth with the Peace of Paris, in 
1815 A.D. ; the thirteenth with the present year, 1884 A.D. A brief 
reference to Literary History follows each period ; and, from the 
Christian era, an equally brief notice of the History of the Christian 
Church. These additional notices are not histories, but mere 
reminders, that the student may not be so absorbed in secular his- 
tory as to ignore altogether the existence of a LITERATURE and of a 
CHURCH. All this, however, is no more than a mere epitome, the 
skeleton, not the body, of the history. Nothing less than the patient 
study and mastery of the works of our great historians can convey 
a correct notion of the history of the past. The perusal of such 
writers as GROTE, THIRLWALL, ARNOLD, GUIZOT, BRYCE, FREE- 
MAN, MAHAFFY, and FYFFE, is, in fact, an education of itself, and 
one of the most likely means of inspiring and developing the 
intellectual life of the student. 

3. In order to maintain a connexion of subjects, as well as the 
order of time, it is desirable for the student to group the histories 
according to their affinities, and to take in order (i) the Oriental 
nations ; (2) the Greeks ; (3) Rome ; (4) the rise of the 
European nationalities ; (5) the Middle Ages ; (6) the Renaissance, 
the Reformation, and the Religious Wars up to 1648 A.D. ; (7) the 
wasteful and unnecessary wars of Louis XIV., his contemporaries 
and their successors up to the French Revolution of 1788 A.D. ; 
(8) the French Revolution, and thence to the present year 1884. 
A list of books, some of them absolutely necessary, and others par- 
ticularly useful as references, is appended. Let it be, however, 
clearly understood that the STUDY of history is no trifling matter. 
If taken up as the mere amusement of leisure moments, in which 
exciting incidents are chiefly regarded, the reader is simply wasting 
his time over unconnected scraps of the romance of history. A 
large amount of hard, dry reading, and, in addition, the habit of 
comparing the statements and opinions of our great historians, is the 
condition of success in this study. Perseverance is rewarded by the 



Preface. ix 

power to look back on the events of the past with such an interest 
as enables us for a time to forget the present, and to place ourselves 
in the standpoint of the great men, the makers of history. We thus 
live again retrospectively as contemporaries of all the generations 
of the past four thousand years, and yet enjoy more thoroughly the 
present age. The panorama of the past is not, however, a pleasing 
one to the thoughtful observer. There is much to gratify in the 
ever-changing exhibition of the several stages in the rise and 
progress of our complex civilisation, in the rapid transition, and 
the alternate predominance and decline of the series of con- 
quering races, and in the marvellous, and oft-recurring, revolutions 
of political power. But, with all this, how painful is the record 
of war, bloodshed, and wholesale murder ; and, what is even 
worse than war and murder, the chronic misery, ignorance, and 
degradation of the major part of the human family. History is to 
us little more than an old almanack, registering details the most 
painful and disgusting, unless we can recognise at the same time the 
unmistakable tokens of moral government and of Divine discipline 
and retribution. If nations be amenable to moral law, they must 
be dealt with " according to their works," while existing as nations. 
Believing in God's moral government "of the world, and in the justice, 
wisdom, and mercy of the divine administration of the world's affairs, 
we find rest in the faith of the Psalmist : " Clouds and darkness are 
round about Him : righteousness and judgment are the habitation of 
His throne " (Psalm xcvii. 2). 

The list of books, some to be read, others to be occasionally con- 
sulted, is now given, arranged according to the order recommended. 

4. Books of reference, useful to those engaged in the study of 
history : 

(i) Chronological Tables: 

NICOLAS (Sir H.), Chronology of History, i2mo. 1839. 

Blair, Chronological Tables, i2mo. (Bohn). 

CLINTON (H. F.), Fasti Hellenici, 3 vols. 41.0. and i2mo. 

Fasti Romani, 2 vols. 4to. and i2mo. 

Hales (W.), New Analysis of Chronology, &c., 4 vols. 8vo, 

1830. 

OXFORD CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES, folio. 
Le Sage, Historical Atlas, folio (many editions). 



x Introduction to the Study of History. 

(2) Geography: 

Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography, 2 vols. 8vo. 1884. 
MURRAY (SMITH), Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, 

2 vols. 8vo. 
FREEMAN (E. A.), Historical Geography of Europe, 2 vols. 

1881. 
KCEPPEN (Louis), The World in the Middle Ages, 2 vols. 

8vo. with atlas. (Appleton, New York, 1856.) 
VON SPRUNER MINKE, Historical Geography Atlas, 4to. 

1880. 
MURRAY, Ancient Atlas, 4to. 

(3) Introductions to History : 

Priestley (Dr. J.), Lectures on History (Rutt), 8vo. 1839. 

Bolingbroke (Lord), Letters on the Study and Use of His- 
tory, 8vo. 1770. 

Bossuet, Discours sur 1'Histoire Universelle, i2mo. 

PLOETZ, Epitome of History, post 8vo. 1884. Very valuable, 
and handy for reference. 

Bigland, Letters on History, 121110. 1840. 

Keightley, Outlines of History, i2mo. 

Stoddart (Sir John), Introduction to Universal History, crown 
8vo. 1850. 

(4) Dictionaries : 

Haydn, Dictionary of Dates, i7th edition, 8vo. 
MURRAY (SMITH), Dictionary of the Bible, 3 vols. 8vo. 

Dictionary of Classical Biography, 3 vols. 8vo. 

Greek and Roman Antiquities, i vol. 8vo. 

WOODWARD and GATES, Encyclopaedia of Chronology, 8vo. 

1872, is invaluable. 

(5) Historical Origins : 

MAINE (H. S.), Ancient Law, Early Law and Customs, 
Village Communities, 3 vols. 8vo. 

N.B. In the following lists of books there is no reference to 
the original historical documents existing in print or in MS. in the 
archives of the European nations, from which our original his- 
torians drew the materials of their great works. The lists given 
are purely for the English reader who desires to master the results 
of the labours of these historians. The references to the Greek and 
Latin classics are to English translations, as there are few non- 
professional persons who can read Latin and Greek with the same 
ease and pleasure as their own tongue. Guizot's remarks on the 



Preface. xi 

study of the Greek and Latin classics, apply, to some extent, to the 
study of good translations. " I approve highly of those few years 
passed in familiar intercourse with antiquity, for if one knows 
nothing of it one is never anything but an upstart in knowledge. 
Greece and Rome are the good society of the human mind " 
(" Guizot in Private Life," 8vo., p. 136). The majority of readers 
must be content to enjoy this good society through the medium of 
an interpreter. 

I. ORIENTAL HISTORY. 

(1) Books referring to Oriental History in general : 

LENORMANT, Ancient History of the East, 2 vols. 121110. ; 

also in 3 vols. 4to. (French). 
HEEREN, Historical Works, 6 vols. 8vo. 
DUNCKER (MAX), History of Antiquity, 6 vols. 8vo. 
Smith (Philip), Ancient History, 3 vols. 8vo. 
Bunsen, Egypt's Place in the World's History, 5 vols. 8vo. 
Lewis (Sir G. Cornewall), Astronomy of the Ancients, 8vo. 
MAHAFFY, Prolegomena of Ancient History, 8vo. 1869. 
RAWLINSON, Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern 

World, 6 vols. 8vo. 
Niebuhr, Lectures on Ancient History and Geography, 

3 vols. 8vo. 

Lectures on Ethnography, 2 vols. Svo. 

Baldwin, Prehistoric Nations, 121110. 1869. 

Eadie, Early Oriental History, 121110. 

Keary (C. F.), Dawn of History, 121110. 1878. 

Primaeval State of Europe, 121110. 1864. 

De Coulanges, Aryan Civilisation, 121110. 1871. 

(2) Books on Babylonia, Chaldea, and Assyria : 

LAYARD, Exploration of Nineveh, &c. 3 vols. Svo. 
MAHAFFY, Twelve Lectures on Primitive Civilisation, 

Svo. 1869. 
Smith (George), Ancient History from the Monuments, 121110. 

(Tract Society). 

The Assyrian Eponym Canon, Svo. 1875. 

Wright, History of the Empire of the Hittites, post Svo. 1884. 
SAYCE (A. H.), The Empires of the East, 121110. 1884. 

Babylonian Literature, Svo. 

Fresh Lights from the Monuments, post Svo. (Tract 

Society). 

HACKNESS, Assyrian Life and History, 121110. (Tract Society). 
Babylonian Life and History, 121110 (Tract 

Society). 



xii Introduction to the Study of History. 

(3) Egypt. 

Wilkinson (Sir J. G.), Egypt, 3 vols. 8vo. 
RAWLINSON (HENRY), Egypt, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Brugsch Bey, History of Egypt, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Sharpe, History of Egypt, 2 vols. i2mo. 

(4) Biblical History : 

MILMAN (Dean), History of the Jews, 3 vols. 8vo ; 1 2mo. also. 
STANLEY (Dean), History of the Jewish Church, 3 vols. 8vo. 
STRACHEY (Sir EDWARD), Jewish History and Politics in the 

Times of Sargon and Sennacherib, 8vo. 1874. 
Russell, Connexion of Sacred and Profane History, 3 vols. 8vo. 
Prideaux, Connexion of Sacred and Profane History, 3 vols. 

8vo. (various editions). 
Ewald, History of the Israelites, 6 vols. 8vo. 
COOKE (Canon), Origins of Religion and Language, i vol. 8vo. 
Kenrick, Phoenicia, 8vo. 

Add to these the historical books of the Old Testament and the 
prophetical writings, together with the history of HERODOTUS (either 
in Rawlinson's or Bohn's edition), leaving out, for the present, the 
very useful but rather perplexing dissertations. W. ROBERTSON 
SMITH on the Hebrew prophets (i2mo.) may be read with advantage. 

From the above list the student will wisely first select MAHAFFY'S 
1 ' Prolegomena" and "Twelve Lectures on Primitive Civilisation," 
SAYCE'S " Empires of the East," Canon COOKE'S " Origins of 
Religion and Language," and Deans Milman and Stanley's " Jewish 
Histories," with Sir EDWARD STRACHEY'S "Jewish History and 
Politics, &c." The interesting fact of a remote connexion between 
the AKKADS of Babylonia and the first foundation of the CHINESE 
civilisation, first discovered by M. Terrien de la Couperie, may lead 
to yet more important discoveries. 

II. THE GREEKS. 
(i) Histories: 

Mitford, History of Greece, 8 vols. 8vo. or i2mo. 
GROTE, History of Greece, 12 vols. 8vo. or 121110*. 
THIRLWALL, History of Greece, 8 vols. 8vo. or i2mo. 
CURTIUS, History of Greece, 5 vols. 8vo. 
Pocock (J.), Early History of Greece, i2mo. 1850. 

(E), India in Greece, i2mo. 1852. 

Cox, Athenian Empire, small (Longman & Co.). 

Greeks and Persians, small (Longman & Co.). 

Sankey, Spartan and Theban Supremacy, small (Longman & 
Co.). 



Preface. xiii 

Ranke, Universal History (chiefly devoted to Greece), 8vo. 
1884. 

(2) Literary History : 

Mure, History of the Language and Literature of Greece, 

5 vols. 8vo. 1850-1857. 
MAHAFFY, History of Classical Greek Literature, 2 vols. 8vo. 

(3) Important References to Greek History : 

MAHAFFY, Social Life in Greece, post 8vo. 1874. 

Rambles and Studies in Greece, post 8vo. 1876. 

GLADSTONE, Juventus Mundi, post 8vo. 1869. 

Studies in Homer, 3 vols. 8vo. 1858. 

FREEMAN (A. E.), Essays, First Series: Ancient Greece 
(Homer), History of Athens, The Athenian Demos, 
Alexander the Great, Greece under Macedonia. Essays, 
Third Series : First Impression of Athens. 

The student should compare GROTE and THIRLWALL in their 
respective views of the Heroic Age, the beginning of free republican 
institutions, the working of the democracies, the real character of 
the sophists, and the causes which led to the domination of 
Macedonia. Great light is thrown on these important matters 
by CURTIUS, MAHAFFY, and A. E. FREEMAN. MAHAFFY has 
courageously dared to give a sober and just estimate of the moral 
character of the ancient Greeks, and FREEMAN has thrown light 
upon the Demos, and, in fact, on every question which he dis- 
cusses. We seem to know the old Greeks much better since 
MAHAFFY and FREEMAN supplemented THIRLWALL and GROTE. 
For the Heroic Ages CURTIUS, GLADSTONE, and MAHAFFY are wise 
guides, avoiding the scepticism of Grote and the occasional credulity 
of J. & E. Pocock and Eadie. But no one can understand the 
Greeks except he peruse HOMER, Hesiod, HERODOTUS, THUCYDIDES, 
Xenophon's Anabasis and CEconomics, PLUTARCH'S "Lives of 
Eminent Greeks," ^ESCHYLUS, SOPHOCLES, EURIPIDES, ARISTO- 
PHANES, DEMOSTHENES'S "Select Orations," and ARISTOTLE'S 
" Ethics and Politics," with portions of PLATO. He is thus brought 
in contact with the Greek mind. This may appear to be a serious 
task, but all real historical study is a branch of mental callisthenics 
requiring real work, rather than a lounge on a playground, in which 
mere amusement or recreation is out of the question. 



xiv Introduction to the Study of History. 

III. ROMAN HISTORY. 

(1) Histories: 

Niebuhr, Lectures on the History of Rome, 3 vols. 8vo. 

- History of Rome, 3 vols. 8vo. 
ARNOLD (Dr.), History of Rome, 3 vols. 8vo. 
MOMMSEN, History of Rome, 5 vols. i2mo. 
Duruy, History of Rome, 3 vols. 4to. 
Ihne, History of Rome, 5 vols. 8vo. 
Liddell, History of Rome, i2mo. 
Keightley, History of Rome, i2mo. 
Cox, History of Rome, i2mo. 
MERIVALE, History of Rome, i2mo. 
Cabinet Encyclopaedia, History of Rome, 2 vols. i2mo. 

(2) Portions of Roman History : 

Dyer, History of the Kings of Rome, Svo. 1868. 

Roma Regalis, Svo. 1878. 
Ihne, Rome to its Capture by the Gauls, small (Longman 

& Co.). 

Seeley (J. R.), Livy's History, with Introduction, 1871. 
Newman (F. W.), Regal Rome, Svo. 
LONG (GEORGE), Decline of the Roman Republic, 5 vols. Svo. 

Plutarch's Lives of Romans, 2 vols. 241110. 

Merivale, Fall of the Roman Republic, post Svo. 

Roman Triumvirate, small (Longman & Co.). 

Beesley, Gracchi Marius Sylla, small (Longman & Co.). 
Trollope, Caesar (Ancient Classics). 

Forsyth, Life of Cicero, Svo. 

Middleton, Life of Cicero, Svo. 

Smith (Boswell), Rome and Carthage, small (Longman & Co.). 

(3) The Empire: 

Capes, Early Roman Empire, small (Longman & Co.). 

Age of the Antonines, small (Longmr,n & Co.). 

Merivale, History of the Empire, 7 vols. Svo. 

Arnold (W. T.), Roman Provisional Administration, 121110. 
1879. 

(4) Roman Law : 

Harris, Pandects of Justinian, 4to. 

Sundry chapters in Gibbon's Roman Empire. 

Savigny's works on Roman Law (in German). 

(5) Discussions: 

Lewis (Sir G. C.) on the Credibility 01 the Early History 
of Rome, 2 vols. Svo. 



Preface. xv 

(6) Sundry Essays : 

FREEMAN (E. A.), Essays, Second Series: Primitive Archaeology 
of Rome, Mommsen's History of Rome, L. S. Sulla, The 
Flavian Caesars. Essays, Third Series : First Impressions 
of Rome. 

ARNOLD with MERIVALE should first be mastered. DURUY'S 
history, now publishing in English, will be improved by the editor- 
ship of MAHAFFY, who might have been more usefully employed 
in giving us students' histories of Greece and Rome. The con- 
troversy on the early ages of Roman history will be found in 
Sir G. C. LEWIS, in DYER and SEELEY. All FREEMAN'S Essays 
must be studied. LONG'S history gives the clearest impressions of 
the gradual decline of the Republic, but it is an instructive rather 
than an exciting work; his edition of PLUTARCH'S "Lives of 
the Romans," with notes, is very valuable. FORSYTH'S and 
MIDDLE-TON'S lives of Cicero may be read and compared with 
advantage, including the letters of Cicero. The little work in 
Lardner's " Cabinet Encyclopaedia " on the " HISTORY OF ROME " 
(2 vols. i2mo.) is admirable. POLYBIUS, though a Greek, should be 
read carefully ; so also portions of LIVY (the Roman Hume), with 
SALLUST and TACITUS. PLINY and STRABO should be consulted ; 
together they form an encyclopaedia of Roman learning and science. 
CICERO'S Offices, /.<?., moral duties ; his orations against Catiline 
and Verres, with the Meditations of the EMPEROR MARCUS 
AURELIUS and the Morals of EPICTETUS, should be read. They 
give us the opinions of sober, thinking men, who, in an age of 
singular corruption, were seekers after God, willing to be led 
by '''the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the 
world" (John i. 9). 

IV. THE RISE AND FALL OF THE EUROPEAN NATIONALITIES. 

GIBBON, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 8 or 12 vols. 8vo. 

(Guizot and Milman). 
GIBBON, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 8 or 7 vols. 121110 

(Bohn). 

SISMONDI, Fall of the Roman Empire, 2 vols. 121110. 
GUIZOT, Civilisation in Europe and in France, 4 vols. i2mo. 
HODGKIN, Italy and her Invaders, 2 vols. 8vo. 



xvi Introduction to the Study of History. 

SHEPPARD (J. G.), the Fall of Rome and the New Nationalities, 

1 2 mo. 

SMYTH (W.), Lectures on Modern History, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Mum, History of the early Khalifate, 8vo. 
FREEMAN (E. A.), Essays, first series, Holy Roman Empire ; The 

French and the Gauls. Essays, third series : The Illyrian Empire ; 

Augusta Treverorum ; Goths at Ravenna ; The Byzantine Empire. 
BRYCE (J.), Holy Roman Empire, post 80. (many editions). 
Robertson, State of Europe (preface to his Life of Charles V.). 
THIERRY (AMDEE), Histoire d'Attila. 

Re'cits de 1'Histoire Romaine au Vme Siecle. 

Nouveau Rcit de 1' Histoire Romaine, I Vme et Vme Siecles. 

(AUGUSTE), Narrative of the Merovingian Era, and Ten Years' 

Historical Studies, 8vo. 

JAMES (G. P. R.), History of Charlemagne, 2 vols. 
Perry (W. C.), The Franks, 8vo. 1867. 
FINLAY, Greece, from the Romans to our Time, 5 vols. 8vo. 

After the chapters in GIBBON relating to the invasion of the empire 
read the work of SHEPPARD (J. G.) ; the " Fall of Rome and the 
Rise of new Nationalities," with GUIZOT'S "Civilisation in Europe 
and in France," 4 vols. i2mo. The Essay in ROBERTSON on the 
State of Europe after the Fall of the Roman Empire will have to 
be checked by a comparison with HALLAM'S " Middle Ages." 
BRYCE (J.), "The Holy Roman Empire" must be read by all who 
desire to understand the influence of a body of beliefs and 
traditions respecting Rome upon Mediaeval history. The reverence 
of our barbarian ancestors for Roman civilisation and law, and for 
Rome as the seat of imperial power, is a singular fact, having also 
an important and beneficent bearing on the events of that unsettled 
period. This fact is shown by BRYCE to be the link which connects 
the history of antiquity through the Middle Ages with the present 
times. HODGKIN'S "Italy and her Invaders," 2 vols. 8vo., with 
SMYTH'S (W.), " Lectures on Modern History," 2 vols. 8vo., will 
naturally follow. MUIR'S " History of the Early KHALIFATE," will 
prepare the reader to understand FREEMAN'S splendid Essay, and 
powerful vindication of the character of the Eastern Byzantine Greek 
Empire, so shamefully libelled by Gibbon and others; all his 
Essays will enliven and deepen the impression which we may have 
already received of the character of this period of history. JAMES 
(G. P. R.), and PERRY (W. C.), with the writings of the two 



Preface. xvii 

THIERRY'S, and SISMONDI'S, " Fall of the Roman Empire," 2 vols., 
carry the history of Europe through the Middle Ages. 

V. THE MIDDLE AGES. 

HALLAM, Middle Ages, 3 vols. 8vo. or 121110. 
DUNHAM, Middle Ages, 3 vols. i2mo. 

Germany, 3 vols. i2mo. (Encyclopaedia, Lardner). 

SISMONDI, History of France, in 8vo. volumes (not translated). 

Italian Republics, i2mo. (Encyclopaedia, Lardner). 

Michelet, History of France (the ist vol. translated). 
KOHLRAUSCH, History of Germany, 8vo. 

MENZEL, History of Germany, 3 vols. Svo. 

STEPHENS (Sir J.), Lectures on the History of France, 2 vols. Svo. 

Palgrave, History of Normandy, 4 vols. Svo. 

Napier, History of Florence, 9 vols. i2mo. 

MACHIAVELLI, History of Florence, 121110. 

Michaud, History of the Crusades, 3 vols. 121110. 

Von Sybel, History of the Literature of the Crusades, 121110. 

DE COMINES (P.), History of Louis XL, 121110. 

KIRK (John F.), History of Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, 

3 vols. Svo. 

FROISSART and MONSTRELET, Chronicles of, 4 vols. Svo. 
PEARSON (Charles), England in the Middle Ages, 2 vols. Svo. 
LONGMAN (W.), Lectures on the History of England, Svo. 

History of the Life and Times of Edward III., 2 vols. Svo. 

Palgrave, Merchant and Friar, and Lord and Vassal, 2 vols. i2mo. 
BUSK (Mrs.), Mediaeval Popes, Emperors, and Kings, from 1125- 

1268, 4 vols. Svo. 

CHURCH, Beginning of the Middle AgesA 
JOHNSON, Normans in Europe, 

Cox, History of the Crusades, Vsmall (Longman & Co.). 

STUBBS, Early Plantagenets, I 

WARBURTON, Edward III., ) 

FREEMAN, (E. A.), Essays, first series: Early Sieges of Paris ; 

Frederick I., King of Italy; Frederick II.; Charles the Bold. 

Second series : Mediaeval Greece and North Italy. Third series : 

Mediaeval and Modern Greece ; The Southern Slaves ; Sicilian 

Cycles ; Normans at Palermo. 
Graham, Archers on the Steppe, 121110. 
Rambach, History of Russia, 2 vols. Svo. 
Ralston, Early Russian History, i2mo. 
Thomson, Ancient Russia and Scandinavia, i2mo. 
Dante (Life by Mrs. Oliphant), i2mo. 
Church's Translation of De Monarchia, post Svo. 

The history of this period is one which will require the student, 

* 



XV111 



Introduction to the Study of History. 



as the readiest way of arriving at a clear conception of the leading 
facts, to compile tables for himself, presenting the contemporary 
events in all the leading European states. The Oxford Tables, or 
any other, will help in the formation of a plan. HALLAM is the 
safest guide generally ; portions of the above list, i.e. some of the 
books, and of these the particular chapters which refer to the 
Middle Ages, should be read. The Chronicles and Memoirs referring 
to the History of France were collected by GUIZOT and published in 
31 vols. 8vo. (in French) : they belonged to the time from Clovis 
to the thirteenth century. The Chronicles of England have been 
published in a cheap form by Bohn. 

VI. THE RENAISSANCE, THE REFORMATION UP TO THE END OF 
THE RELIGIOUS WARS, 1648 A.D. 

SYMONDS (J. A.), History of the Renaissance in Italy, 3 vols. 8vo. 
HALLAM, Introduction to the Literary History of the Fifteenth, Six- 
teenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, 3 vols. 8vo. 
Roscoe, Life of Lorenzo de Medici, 2 vols. 8vo. and 121110. 

Leo X., 7 vols. 8vo. and 12 mo. 

MAJOR, Life of Prince Henry of Portugal, and its Results, 8vo. 
ROBERTSON, History of the Discovery of America, 3 vols. 

History of Charles V., 3 vols. 

Irving (Washington), Life and Voyages of Columbus, 4 vols. 8vo. 

Companions of Columbus, 121110. 

FROUDE, History of England, 12 vols. post 8vo. 
HELPS, The Spanish Conquest of America, 4 vols. 8vo. 

N.B. Reprinted in a series of Biographies of the Spanish conquerors, 
Cortez, Pizarro, &c. 

BAIRD, Rise of the Huguenots, 2 vols. crown 8vo. 

GARDINER (S. R.), Puritan Revolution, small (Longman & Co.) 

Thirty Years' War, small (Longman & Co.) 

History of England from James I. to the Civil War, 1603- 

1642, 10 vols. post 8vo. 
MITCHELL, Life of Wallenstein, 8vo. 
Hart, Life of Gustavus Adolphus, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Holling, Life of Gustavus Adolphus, i2mo. 
PRESCOTT, Ferdinand and Isabella, 3 vols. 8vo. 

Conquest of Mexico and Peru, 6 vols. 8vo. 

History of Philip II., 3 vols. 8vo. 

RANKE, History of the Reformation, 3 vols. 8vo 

Civil Wars of France, 2 vols. i2mo. 

Ottoman and Spanish Empires in the Sixteenth and Seven- 
teenth Centuries, 8vo. 



Preface* xix 

D'AUBIGNE, History of the Reformation, 5 vols. 8vo. 
Worsley (Henry) Life of Martin Luther, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Michelet, Memoir of Luther, 8vo. 
HARE (Archdeacon), Vindication of Luther, 8vo. 
MOTLEY, Rise of the Dutch Republic, 3 vols. 

History of the United Netherlands, 4 vols. 

Life of Barneveldt, 2 vols. 

SARPI (Paul), History of the Council of Trent, folio. 

SULLY, Memoirs, 5 vols. 8vo. 

Retz (Cardinal), Memoirs, 4 vols. 121110. 

James, Life and Times of Henry IV. of France, 4 vols. 8vo. 

Macaulay, Essays : Lord Bacon, Van Ranke, Machiavelli, Burleigh, 

and Hallam. 

HUME, History of England from Charles I. 
LINGARD, History of England. 

We know more of the secret history of this period than of any 
preceding, owing to the access now open to the State archives, 
letters, memoirs, &c., of the parties who made the history of their 
age. Such a revelation of insincerity, falsehood, treachery, and 
cruelty, associated with the cause of religion, has never before or 
since been exhibited to the world. " Everybody wore a mask. 
.... No portion of history is more bewildering, difficult, and 
unsatisfactory." The only great political event, after the reign of 
Charles V., was the resistance of the Seven United Provinces to 
Spain and the consequent overthrow of the Austro-Spanish Con- 
federacy against European liberty. The most interesting facts are 
connected with the Portuguese and Spanish discoveries eastward 
and westward. MAJOR'S " Life of Prince Henry of Portugal," and 
WASHINGTON IRVING and HELPS'S Lives of Columbus and his 
followers, are our best authorities. Add to these PRESCOTT and 
MOTLEY. The clearest and most impartial account of the beginning 
of the Thirty Years' War is found in GARDINER'S " History of the 
Thirty Years' War " (small) and his " History of James I. and 
Charles I. up to 1642," 10 vols. i2mo. There is a history in 
German, by VON ANTON GINDELY, of the Thirty Years' War, which 
is said to be the best, but it is not yet translated into English. The 
" History of the Reformation," by RANKE, and by D'AUBIGNE, are 
from very different points of view. ROBERTSON and ROSCOE write 
as if the interests of literature and art were far more important than 

b 2 



xx Introduction to the Study of History. 

those of religious liberty and political freedom. HALLAM is con- 
sidered by Archdeacon HARE to have misunderstood the views of 
the great Reformer, Martin Luther, and the Archdeacon has 
replied in his able vindication of Luther, 8vo. 

VII. THE WASTEFUL AND UNNECESSARY WARS OF Louis XIV., 
HIS CONTEMPORARIES AND THEIR SUCCESSORS, FROM 1648 TO 
THE REVOLUTION OF 1788 A.D. 

DYFR History of Europe from the Fall of Constantinople, 5 vols. 8vo. 
SCHLOSSER, History of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, 

8 vols. 8vo. 
HEEREN, Manual of the History of the Political Systems of Europe 

and its Colonies from the Fifteenth Century, 2 vols. 8vo. 
VOLTAIRE, Lives of Louis XIV. and XV. (various editions}. 
James, Life of Louis XIV, 4 vols. 8vo. 
RANKE, History of England principally in the Seventeenth Century, 

6 vols. 8vo. 
RANKE, History of the House of Brandenburg, Seventeenth and 

Eighteenth Centuries, 3 vols. 8vo. 
ST. SIMON, Memoirs, by Bayle St. John, 3 vols. 8vo. 
PEPYS, Diary, 4 vols. i2mo. 
Evelyn, Diary, 4 vols. 12 mo. 
Burnett, History of his own Times, 6 vols. 8vo. 
Clarendon, History of the Civil Wars, 6 vols. 8vo. 
HUTCHINSON (LUCY), Memoirs of her Husband, 8vo. 
Nugent (Lord), Memoirs of Hampden, 8vo. 
MACAULAY, Essays : Sir W. Temple, Hampden, Sir W. Mackintosh 

(History), Addison, War of Succession in Spain, Horace Walpole, 

William Pitt the Elder (Lord Chatham), William Pitt, Lord Clive, 

Warren Hastings, Madame d'Arblay, Frederick the Great. 
MACAULAY, History of England, 5 vols. 8vo. 
BANCROFT, History of the United States, 7 vols. i2mo. 
LECKY, History of England from 1700, 4 vols. 8vo. 
Pictorial History of England from Charles I. to George III. 
Knight, History of England from Charles I. to Victoria. 
Wraxall, History of France, 1574-1610, 6 vols. 8vo. 
CARLYLE, Life and Letters of Oliver Cromwell, 3 vols. 8vo. 
CARLYLE, Life of Frederick II. (the Great) of Prussia, 7 vols. 8vo. 
D'AUBIGNE, Life of Oliver Cromwell, 8vo. 

VAUGHAN (Dr. R.), Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Panton, Oliver Cromwell, 8vo. 
COXE, House of Austria, 3 vols. i2mo. (Bohn). 

Kings of Spain (Bourbon), 5 vols. 8vo. 

- Life of the Duke of Marlborough, 3 vols. i2mo. (Bohn). 
Life of Sir Robert Walpole, 4 vols. 8vo. 



Preface. xxi 

MACKNIGHT'S Life of Bolingbroke, 8vo. 

SWIFT, Life of, by Foster and Craik, 2 vols. 8vo. 

Crowe, History of France, 5 vols. 8vo. 

HUME, History of the Stuarts ; BRODIE'S Reply to Hume, 2 vols. 8vo. 

STANHOPE (Earl), History of Europe from Queen Anne to 1748, 

7 vols. i2mo. 

BURTON (J. H.), Reign of Queen Anne, 3 vols. 8vo. 
MORRIS, Age of Queen Anne (Epochs, Longman). 
HALE, Fall of the Stuarts (Epochs, Longman). 
Yonge, History of the Bourbons, 4 vols. 8vo. 

N.B. There are also numerous memoirs in the French language, all 
of which throw light on the manners and morals of French society. 

. Horace Walpole's Letters, &c., and the numerous Memoirs, Diaries, 
&c., since published refer mainly to English society. 

Ludlow, History of the War of American Independence, small 

(Epochs, Longman). 

MACKNIGHT, Life of Edmund Burke, 3 vols. 8vo. 
BURKE, Reflections on the French Revolution, 121110. ; Reply by 

Mackintosh. 



DYER and SCHLOSSER and HEEREN, with Earl STANHOPE, are 
useful guides in helping the reader to classify and state, after his own 
fashion, the leading events of this period. MACAULAY'S Histories 
and Essays will, of course, be read. LECKY'S History of England 
from 1 700 should be carefully studied. The ENGLISH REVOLUTIONS 
of 1640-1688 should be thoroughly canvassed. CLARENDON, 
BURNETT, CARLYLE, VAUGHAN, and PANTON for that of 1640, and 
by old RAPIN, MACAULAY, HUME, BRODIE, HALE, MORRIS, BURTON, 
and MACKNIGHT'S Bolingbroke for that of 1688. The history of the 
resistance of Europe to the attempts of Louis XIV. to domineer over 
Europe will always interest, while the rise of Prussia and the reign 
of Frederick the Great, conterminous with the increase of the political 
influence of Russia over Western Europe, are facts the results of 
which, partly beneficial, are seen in the present political condition 
of Europe. In the admiration of the bravery and skill of the 
generals we must not forget the peculiar senselessness and wicked- 
ness of most of the wars of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. 
The misery of Belgium, Germany, Poland, North Italy, and Spain, 
in which these wars were carried on, should be kept in mind, and 
the authors of these wars should be exhibited in their true colours 
as the enemies of humanity. The stupidity and mischievous help- 



xxii Introduction to the Study of History. 

lessness of most of the Kings of Spain and of the Emperors of 
Austria, the unprincipledness of the petty rulers of the Germanjind 
Italian principalities, require to be laid open in detail. Two men 
who desired peace are to be held up to the admiration of posterity, 
Sir ROBERT WALPOLE and CARDINAL FLEURY, however blamable in 
other respects. 

The independence of the United States, and the spirit of reform 
which led the leading statesmen of Europe to initiate (after a 
fashion) important changes in their domestic government, are the 
only pleasurable records of the eighteenth century. 

VIII. THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, 1788, 1789, TO THE 
YEAR 1884 A.D. 

Thiers, History of the French Revolution, 5 vols. 8vo. 

History of the Consulate and the Empire, 5 vols. 8vo. 

ALISON, History of Europe from 1789-1815, 10 vols. Svo. 

History of Europe from 1815-1850, 8 vols. Svo. 

VON SYBEL, History of the French Revolution, 4 vols. Svo. 

FYFFE, History of Europe, 1788-1815, i vol. Svo. (The [second 

and third vols., to the present time, in the press.) 
LANFREY, History of Napoleon, 4 vols. Svo. 
SCOTT (Sir W.), Life of Napoleon. 

[The Memoirs of Las Casas, Bourrienne, Junot, and others, some 

of them of very questionable accuracy.] 
TAINE, Ancient Regime, Svo. 

the Revolution, Svo. 

the Jacobin Conquest, Svo. 

NAPIER (Sir W. F. P.), History of the Peninsular War, 6 vols. Svo. 

Mignet, History of the French Revolution, Svo. 

Michelet, Historic View of the French Revolution, i2mo. 

LECKY, History of Germany from 1 700, 4 vols. Svo. 

Smyth (W.), Lectures, French Revolution, 3 vols. Svo. 

CARLYLE, the French Revolution, 3 vols. Svo. 

Massey, History of England under George III., 3 vols. 121110. 

STANHOPE, Life of William Pitt, 4 vols. 121110. 

MARTINEAU (Miss), History of the Peace following 1815, with 

Introduction, 5 vols. 12 mo. 

MOLESWORTH, History of England, from 1830-1867, 3 vols. i2mo. 
WALPOLE (SPENCER), History of England, 1815-1841, 3 vols. Svo. 
MACAULAY, Essays : Lord Holland. 
Cassell, History of England from the Reign of George III., 

vols. 5-9. 

KNIGHT (C), History of England, George III. to Queen Victoria. 
Pictorial History of England from Charles I. to the end. 



Preface. xxiii 

WADE, History of England, 8vo. 

GREEN (J. R.), Short History of the English People, 12 mo. 

History, 4 vols. 8vo. 

Making of England, 8vo. 

Conquest of England, 8vo. 

MACARTHY (JUSTIN), History of Our Own Times, 4 vols. i2mo. 
IRVING, Annals of the Reign of Queen Victoria, 1837-1878, 3 vols. 



The books devoted to the history of the FRENCH REVOLUTION 
and its wars up to 1815 are TRIERS, ALISON, VON SYBEL, FYFFE, 
and CARLYLE. The Lives of Napoleon by Sir WALTER SCOTT and 
LANFREY will help to form a just opinion of that remarkable man. 
For the Revolution itself SMYTH may be read with advantage, but 
TAINE is the great authority. Thiers, and the other French his- 
torians, are more or less apologists for the leading actors in that great 
convulsion, and either minify or conceal the calamities endured by 
the French people in its progress up to the period of the Directory. 
Of FYFFE'S History, reference has been made in page 487. 
NAPIER'S " History of the Peninsular War," though far from com- 
plimentary to the English Ministry, does justice to the character 
and ability of the Iron Duke. The history since 1815 may be read 
in Miss MARTINEAU, 5 vols. ; MOLESWORTH, 3 vols. ; and SPENCER 
WALPOLE, 3 vols. 8vo. ; and also in CASSELL'S " History of England 
under George IV., William IV., and Queen Victoria," up to the 
present time, which is a very readable and fair compilation of our 
recent history. JUSTIN MCCARTHY has written a very lively " History 
of Our Own Times " (from the accession of Victoria). GREEN'S 
Histories in 121110. and in 4 vols. 8vo., need no recommendation. 
They contain some valuable and impartial statements respecting 
England and its conduct in connexion with the French revolutionary 
proceedings; and the "Pictorial History of England" for that 
period is full and reasonable. There are dozens of volumes relating 
to France, Germany, and Italy, and Spain, Russia, and Poland, and 
Turkey, and their political changes since 1815, some of them very 
valuable, but they belong rather to the local histories than to the 
general history of the world. So far as England is concerned, the 
Lives of PITT, BURKE, Lord LIVERPOOL, CANNING, Sir ROBERT 
PEEL, Lord PALMERSTON, Lord MACAULAY, CHARLES J. Fox (by 



xxiv Introduction to the Study of History. 

Lord Russell), Lord MELBOURNE, Lord BROUGHAM, SYDNEY SMITH, 
Croker, and Lord Malmesbury, &c., may be read with advantage 
For our Indian history, the Lives of CLIVE, WARREN HASTINGS, 
ELLENBOROUGH, DALHOUSIE, and other Governors-General should 
be read. The two great histories of India are by Mill and Thornton; 
the narrative of the Sepoy Mutiny has been written by KAYE and 
MALLESON, and by HOLMES and others. Every month some work 
of history or biography appeals to the public judgment in favour of 
new views, or some qualification of old ones, respecting the events 
of the past century, a century perhaps the most eventful and the 
most important in its influence upon the future of any since the 
world began. The political summaries month by month in some of 
the magazines, especially in the Fortnightly, Contemporary, and 
Macmillan, are not only useful summaries, but suggestive and valu- 
able to the reader. 

Much, however, as we may insist upon the study of political history, 
without fear of dissent, there is another branch of universal history 
which must be studied in connexion with secular history. The 
great fact of all facts, the most extraordinary and influential in the 
history of the world, i.e., the incarnation, life, and death, and the 
teachings of our Lord and of his Apostles, together with the history 
cf the Churches formed by them ; these are the topics which form 
what is called Ecclesiastical History. In our day it has been written 
by men of the highest literary ability and of wide and genial sym- 
pathies, strangers to the odium theologicum too often manifested by 
ecclesiastical writers. No man can claim the position of an educated 
man who has paid no attention to this important branch of historical 
knowledge. 

5. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY may be first studied in Murray's 
Compendiums of General and English Church History ; then in 
MILMAN, 9 vols., and ROBERTSON, 8 vols. But, to do full justice 
to this branch of history, there are THREE works which must be 
carefully read and often referred to. J. C. GEISLER, 5 vols. 8vo.; 
Thomas GREENWOOD'S " Cathedra Petri," 6 vols. 8vo., of all his- 
tories one of the most trustworthy and impartial, and well fitted to 
guide towards right conclusions; NEANDER, 9 vols. 8vo. ; MOSHEIM 
is valuable, especially in his "Affairs of the Christians before Con- 



Preface. xxv 

slantine." His other work, in six volumes, serves as an index to 
most of the great questions in the history of the Church up to 
the seventeenth century. MILNER gives the history of the genuine 
Christianity found in the Churches before the Reformation. He 
was the first to do justice to the piety of the Middle Ages, and 
to the reality of the religion experienced by men whose creed 
fell short of Scriptural truth. The vehement, unmeasured abuse 
poured out upon his history by some of the High Church party, 
and the affected contempt occasionally shown by the extreme 
Liberals of the Broad Church party, may be to the sober reader 
a warrant for its independent religious character. It should be 
referred to for information as to the real Christianity existing 
in the past ages, even the darkest, of the Church. Of the history 
of the ENGLISH CHURCH (Episcopalian) we have ABBEY and 
OVERTON'S "English Church in the Eighteenth Century," 2 vols. 
8vo. ; PERRY'S " History of the Church of England," 3 vols. 8vo. ; 
DR. HOOK'S "Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury up to James" 
(very genial and fair from a High Churchman's standpoint) ; HORE 
(A. H.), " Eighteen Centuries of the Church in England," 8vo., 1881 ; 
MOLESWORTH (W. N.), " History of the Church of England from 
1660," post 8vo., 1882. LECKY'S remarks on ecclesiastical affairs 
are valuable from his philosophical standpoint. The ROMAN 
CATHOLIC CHURCH- History of England, by DODD, from 1500 to 
1688 (with Tierney's continuation), 5 vols. 8vo., gives the Romanist 
view, and ought to be carefully read, in common with Archdeacon 
REYNOLDS'S Reply, 8vo. A work, which, for its impartiality, appears 
as if written by a most Liberal Episcopalian, or by a kindly Non- 
conformist, of which DR. J. STOUGHTON, the Congregationalist, is 
the author, gives a peculiar interest to the history of the English 
Churches, Episcopalian, Nonconformist, and Presbyterian, since 
1640 A.D. No one can read the eight volumes of this history with- 
out learning much that will modify and correct his prejudices. There 
is not a fairer or more genial work in our language. Its title is, 
" The History of Religion in England" The author enjoyed the 
friendship and esteem of the late Bishop SELWYN, and of the late 
Archbishop TAIT. 

I have not thought it necessary to notice the disputes respecting 



xxvi Introduction to the Study of History. 

the character and judgment of the Fathers of the Anti-Nicean 
Church and the century following. In DONALDSON'S " History of 
Christian Literature and Doctrine during the First Three Centuries," 
3 vols. 8vo. ; in D'AiLLE, on " The Use of the Fathers," 8vo., with 
BLUNT'S work in reply, 8vo. ; in ISAAC TAYLOR'S (Senior) "Ancient 
Christianity," 2 vols. 8vo., most readers will find as much as they 
care to know. REEVES (W.), has also, in his translation of Justin 
Martyr, &c., treated on the right use of the Fathers, 2 vols. 8vo. 
Bishop KAYE'S three works on Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, 
and the Council of Nice ; STANLEY, on the Eastern Church and the 
Council of Nice, may be read with advantage. Bishop LIGHTFOOT'S 
Dissertations, prefaced to his " St. Clement of Rome," and to the 
Epistles to the Galatians, Philippians, and Colossians, are very 
valuable. For the general history of the old Church literature, before 
the Reformation especially, the most impartial of the Romanists are 
Fleury and Du-Pin. Dr. Smith's Dictionaries of CHRISTIAN ANTI- 
QUITIES and CHRISTIAN BIOGRAPHY, 6 vols., royal 8vo. (Murray), 
are invaluable. Many of 'the biographies are most interesting 
reading, and are the most satisfactory records of the great eccle- 
siastics of the Early and Mediaeval Church. BINGHAM'S " Origines 
Ecclesiastics " is the great work on ecclesiastical antiquities. 
RIDDLE'S (J. E.) work in one thick volume, 8vo., 1839, is more 
convenient for the general reader. 

The LITERARY HISTORY is little more than an index of names, 
but will serve to remind the student of the existence of a literature, 
Biblical, Egyptian, Oriental, Greek, and Roman, from the most 
remote period. In the very brief sketches of the Schools of 
Philosophy, the distinctive peculiarities of each school have been 
exhibited. The histories of Greek and Roman literature, and the 
histories of philosophy referred to in this volume are my main 
authorities for the subjects to which they refer. Hallatris " Intro- 
duction to the Literary History of the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seven- 
teenth Centuries"; Sismondfs " Literature of the South of Europe"; 
Berringtoris " Literary History of the Middle Ages," with various 
histories of American, French, Italian, German, and Sclavonic litera- 
ture, will assist the student in his researches in this department. 
English literary history has recently been a favourite study in our 



Preface. xxvii 

schools of learning. CRAIK'S unpretending " Sketches of the History 
of Literature and Learning in England," 6 vols. i8mo., 1844, is one 
of the best introductory works for English literature, as GOSTWICK 
and HARRISON'S is for German literature. A general history of 
European literature from the seventeenth century is a desideratum 
which will no doubt in due time be supplied. 

6. Beyond the remarks in pp. 45-47, I have not discussed the 
controversial question of the " Origin of Religion." No additional 
light has been thrown on the subject by the learned " HIBBERT 
Lecturers." ToTheists the problem presents no difficulties. "The 
existence of a Being from whom our own being has been derived 
involves, at least, the possibility of some communication direct or 
indirect. Yet the impossibility, or the improbability, of any such 
communication is another of the assumptions continually involved 
in current theories about the origin of religion. Now it is quite 
certain that no such assumption can be reasonably made. The 
perceptions of the human mind are accessible to the intimations of 
external truth through many avenues of approach. In its very 
structure it is made to be responsive to some of these intimations 
by immediate apprehension. Man has that within him by which 
the invisible can be seen, and the inaudible can be heard, and the 
intangible can be felt. Not as the result of any reasoning, but by 
the same power by which it sees and feels the postulates on which 
all reasoning rests, the human mind may, from the very first, have 
felt that it was in contact with a mind which was the fountain of its 
own." 1 This is the fact, in accordance with the revelations con- 
tained in the early chapters of the Book of Genesis. With Canon 
COOKE we are compelled to believe that " all truths which affect the 
relations between man and God were made known by Divine 
revelation," and that the facts resulting from the most diligent 
inquiries into the origins of religious beliefs "are absolutely 
irreconcileable with the theory which regards all spiritual and soul- 
elevating religions as evolved by a natural process from a primitive 
naturalistic polytheism." 2 In the same spirit Guizot remarks, 
"When my intellectual transformation took place, when my 

1 Duke of Argyll on the " Unity of Nations," pp. 451, 452. 

2 " Origin of Religion and Language," 8vo. 



XXV1I1 



Introduction to the Study of History. 



opinions became settled, I turned my thoughts chiefly towards the 
order of the universe, the destiny of man, the course, the laws, and 
the aim of the Divine development. It was while considering these 
subjects that the conviction of the Divine intervention flashed upon 
me, and I recognised clearly and irresistibly the supreme Mind and 
Will. They manifest themselves to me in the history of the world 
as clearly as in the movements of the stars. God shows himself to 
me in the laws which regulate human progress as evidently much 
more evidently, as I think than in those which direct the rising 
and setting of the sun" ("Guizot in Private Life," p. 114). 



ERRATA. 



Page 22, 
94, 
155, 
156, 
163, 
172, 

189, 
244, 
>, 265, 
270, 
304, 
3, 
336, 
350, 
394, 
, 442, 
444 
445 



9, 
36, 
25, 

2, 
34. 



line 2, read Semiramis for Semiramus. 
27, were for was. 

2 > John for James. 

vindicating for vindicated. 
Damasus for Damascus. 
raised for tripled. 
submitted after A. D. 
their for thier. 

13, Magnus IV. for Magnus III, 

1 6, omit time. 

4, read decided for divided. 
3 1 . ,, da Romano for di Romeno. 
40, 1700/^1706. 
34. ,, Verden for Verdun. 
23, insert led before vague. 

6, WHorsley>rHorseley. 
in the note , , Literary for Library. 
lme 36, given birth for gone back. 



CONTENTS. 



PRELIMINARY NOTES ... ... ... ... ... Page i 

1 The Chronology of the Ancient Nations ... ... i 

2 The Original Seat of the Human Race after the Flood 5 

3 The Unity of the Human Race 8 

4 The Dispersion ... ... ... ... ... 10 

5 Language and the Varieties of Language ... ... 12 

6 Sundry speculations on the Origin and former Con- 

dition of Man 14 

FIRST PERIOD. The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. ... 17 

Babylonia, Chaldea, the Plains of Shinar ... ... 19 

Assyria 21 

Egypt 23 

The Khita (Hittites) ... ... ... 27 

Asia Minor 28 

The Phoenicians ... ... ... ... ... ... 29 

The Israelites ... ... ... ... ... ... 31 

The Population of Europe ... ... ... ... 36 

Greece 36 

Italy The Etruscans ... ... ... ... ... 40 

Arabia ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 42 

India ... ... ... ... ... ... 43 

China ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 45 

Religious History ... ... ... ... ... ... 45 

Literature, Art of Writing, the Alphabet 47 

State of the World 1000 B.C. ... ... ... ... 49 

SECOND PERIOD. From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 

539 4 ... 52 

The Israelites ... ... ... ... ... ... 52 

Assyria ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 54 

Babylon, the Medes and Persians, Egypt, Lydia ... 57 

Greece and the Hellenic World ... ... ... ... 60 

Greek Colonies ... ... ... ... ... ... 63 

Italy, Rome under the Kings ... 65 

Carthage ... ... ... *... ... ... ... 67 

India, China 68 

Religious History 68 



XXX 



Introduction to the Study of History. 

Literature, Hebrew Pa Z e 1 

Greek ?i 

Greek Philosophy 7 2 

State of the World 539 B.C 75 

THIRD PERIOD. From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 
CIQ B C. t to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 

lilac - 78 

The Persian Empire 7 8 

Greece 82 

The Persian War 8 4 

The Peloponnesian War 86 

The Spartan and Theban War 88 

The Israelites 89 

Philip of Macedon 9 

Alexander the Great, Invasion of Persia 91 

Carthage 93 

Rome a Republic ... ... ... 94 

India 95 

China 9 6 

Literature, Greek 96 

Greek Philosophy ... 97 

State of the World 330 B.C. 99 

FOURTH PERIOD. From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

to the Christian Era 101 

Division of Alexander's Empire ... ... ... ... 101 

Decline of Greece 102 

Rome Master of Italy 104 

The Punic Wars 105 

Roman Conquests 107-110 

Internal History of Rome ... ... ... ... m 

The Land Laws (Latifundia) 112 

The Gracchi ... ... ... ... ... 113-114 

TheCimbri 115 

Marius and Sylla 116-118 

Pompey and Caesar 118-121 

Marc Antony the Triumvirates 122 

Augustus the Imperator 123 

The Roman Empire ... 123 

The Jews I27 

India, China I2 8 

Japan \\\ I29 

Literature, Greek I29 

Greek Philosophy ... T ^ o 

Jewish Literature ... !^o 

State of the World, A.D. i .'.'.' .'.'.' .'" ", t i 



Contents. xxxi 

FIFTH PERIOD. The Empire to the Final Division by Theo- 

dosius, 395 A.D. ... Page 133 

Cause of the Decline of the Empire ... ... ... 144 

The Barbarians beyond the Roman World to the East ... 151 

The Trade of the Empire 153 

Ecclesiastical History The Christian Church 154 

Literature 164 

State of the World 395 A.D. ... ... ... ... 167 

SIXTH PERIOD. From the Division of the Empire to the 
Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne 

800 A.D " 169 

The Western Empire ... ... ... ... ... 169 

The Goths, Huns, and Vandals ... ... ... ... 171 

Barbarian Settlements and the New Nationalities ... 175 

Gaul, the Franks ... ... ... ... ... ... 176 

Spain, Vandals, Suevi and Goths ... ... ... ... 177 

Britain, the Saxons ... ... ... ... ... 177 

North Africa ... ... ... ... ... ... 178 

Italy under the Heruli and the Goths ... ... ... 179 

Nature and character of the Barbarian Invasions ... 182 

The Eastern Empire up to the Saracen Invasion ... 184 

Rise and progress of the Saracens ... ... ... 187 

The Empire of the German Franks 190 

The Avars ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 193 

The Eastern Empire to the time of Charlemagne ... 195 

Scandinavia and the Eastern Plains 196 

India, China ... ... ... ... . ., ... 198 

Ecclesiastical History ... ... ... ... ... 198 

Literature 205 

Philosophy, Boetius and the Neo-Platonists ... 206, 207 

State of the World 207 

SEVENTH PERIOD. From the Empire of Charlemagne to the 

Crusades, 1096 A.D. ... ... ... ... 210 

The Empire of Charlemagne 210 

Decline of the Carlovingian Empire ... ... ... 216 

The Feudal System 218 

The Ravages of the Normans, Huns, and Saracens ... 223 
The Three Kingdoms offshoots of the Carlovingian 

Empire: ... ... ... ... ... ... 226 

France 226 

Germany ... ... ... ... ... ... 227 

Italy ... ... ... ... ... ... 231 

The Contemporary European Nations 233 

Spain 233 

The British Islands 233 

Scandinavia ... ... ... ... ... .. 234 



xxxii Introduction to the Study of History. 

The Plains East of Germany fa & 2 34 

The Eastern Empire 

The Mahometan Khalifat 2 3 

India, China, Japan 37 

North Africa ... 2 3? 

Ecclesiastical History 

Literary History 

Navigation and Discovery 2 44 

State of the World, 1 096 A.D 2 45 

EIGHTH PERIOD. From the Crusades to the Reign of Rudolph 

ofHapsburg, 1273 A.D 2 4 

The Crusades 2 4 8 

Contest respecting Investitures between the Papacy and 

the Empire 2 54 

Rise of an order of Burgesses and Citizens, and the 

formation of Municipalities 2 57 

Predominant influence of the Papacy 259 

Irruption of the Mogul (Mongul) Tartars under Ghengis 

Khan 261 

Leading Nations of this Period 265 

Norway, Sweden ... ... ... ... 265 

Denmark 266 

The British Islands, Germany 267 

Bohemia, Hungary, Poland ... ... 270 

Livonia, Esthonia ... ... ... ... 270 

Lithuania, Prussia, Moldavia, Wallachia, and Russia ... 271 

France 271 

Spain : ... 272 

Italy 272 

Eastern Byzantine Empire ... ... ... 274 

Seljuk Turks, Mongul States, India 274 

China, Japan, Egypt, North Africa ... 275 

Ecclesiastical History ... ... ... ... .- 275 

Literary History 276 

Philosophy 277 

The Scholastic Theology and Philosophy 278 

Discovery of the Properties and Use of the Magnet ... 280 

State of the World 1273 A.D 28r 

NINTH PERIOD. From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273, to the 

Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. ... 283 
Consolidation of the Kingdoms of England, France, and 

Spain 284 

Continued Disintegration of Germany 288 

Rise and Establishment of the House of Austria ... 291 
Collision of the Claims of France, Germany, and Spain in 

Italy 22 



Contents. xxxiii 

Extinction of the Greek Empire of the East, 1453, and 

the Establishment of the Turks in Europe ... Page 293 

Consolidation of the Czarship in Russia 295 

Learning, Science, and the Art of Printing ... ... 296 

Two Inventions, Gunpowder and the Mariner's Com- 
pass ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 300 

Discovery of the Passage to India by the Cape of Good 

Hope, 1486-1497 301 

Discovery of America by Columbus, 1492 ... ... 302 

Progress of Trade, Agriculture, &c. 305 

Contemporary History of Norway, Sweden, and Den- 
mark ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 308 

Poland, Hungary, Prussia ... ... ... ... ... 309 

Turkey, Italy 310 

Mongolian Irruption under Tamerlane ... ... ... 312 

Persia, India, China 313 

Japan, Trade in general ... ... ... ... ... 314 

Ecclesiastical History ... ... ... ... ... 314 

Literary History 318 

State of the World 1520 A.U 322 

TENTH PERIOD. From Charles V. of Germany^ 1520, to the 

English Revolution, 1688 .., ... ... ... 325 

Rivalry of France with Germany and Spain ... ... 325 

The Reformation ... ... ... ... ... ... 328 

Decline of the Spanish Monarchy under Philip II. ... 334 

Growth of the Power of France and England ... ... 337 

The Turkish Power at its height under Solyman ... 341 

The Thirty Years' War in Germany 345 

Aggressive Policy and Wars of Louis XIV. ... ... 353 

First appearance of Russia and Prussia in European 

Politics ... ... ... ... ... 357 

Contemporary Histories, Scandinavian Nations ... ... 359 

Seven United Provinces (Holland) ... ... ... 361 

Portugal ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 362 

Switzerland 363 

Poland 364 

Italy 364 

Turkey, Barbary States, Persia, India, China 365 

Japan, European Settlements in America ... ... 366 

Maritime Discovery by Spain, Portugal, England, Hol- 
land, France, and Denmark ... ... ... 366-368 

The Buccaneers 368 

Trade and Commerce 369 

Ecclesiastical History ... ... ... ... ... 370 

Literary History ... ... ... ... ... ... 381 

Philosophy 388 

State of the World 1688 A.D 389 

c 



XXXIV 



Introduction to the Study of History. 



ELEVENTH PERIOD./>W the English Revolution, 1688 to 

the French Revolution, 1788 Pa& 394 

A Retrospect '' " 394 

From the Revolution of 1688 to the Peace of Ryswick, 

1697 395 

Preparation for the War of the Spanish Succession ... 397 

War of the Spanish Succession, 1702-1713 ... 399 

Great Northern War of Russia and Sweden, 1697-1709... 401 

The Western Powers, 1 717-173 r 403 

War of the Polish Succession, 1 733-1 738 404 

War of the Austrian Succession, 1740-1748 404 

The Seven Years' War between Austria and Prussia, 

1756-1762 ... 47 

First Partition of Poland, 1772 ... ... 408 

War of the thirteen Colonies of America with England, 

1773-1783 4io 

Moral Condition of the Governments of Europe m the 

Eighteenth Century 4*3 

Efforts towards Improvement ... 416 

Local Histories ... 4 22 

Denmark and Norway ... 422 

Sweden, Germany ... 423 

Prussia, Poland ... ... ... ... ... ... 424 

Switzerland, Holland 425 

Great Britain and Ireland, Spain 426 

Portugal, Italy, Russia 427 

Turkey ... 428 

Persia, India, China 429 

Japan, Africa, United States ... ... ... ... 430 

Ecclesiastical History 430 

Literary History ... ... ... ... ... ... 439 

Philosophy 444,447,449 

State of the World, 1788 450 

TWELFTH PERIOD. From the Revolution in France, 1788, to 

the Peace of Paris, 1815 ... ... ... ... 454 

Introductory ... ... ... ... ... ... 454 

Causes of the Revolution 456 

Leading Events of the Revolution up to 1795 The 

Directory ... ... ... ... ... ... 464 

Wars of the Revolution to the Consulate of Buonaparte, 

1792-1799 487 

Wars of the Consulate and Empire, 1800-1815 495 

Local Histories 1788-1815 505 

England, Scotland, Ireland e c 

Spain ** 

Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Prussia 508 



Contents. xxxv 

Holland, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, Turkey ... Page 509 

Persia, India, China, Japan, United States of America ... 510 

British Colonies 511 

Ecclesiastical History 511 

Literary History ... ... ... ... ... ... 514 

State of the World 520 

THIRTEENTH PERIOD. From the Peace of Paris , 1815, to 1884 524 

From 1815 to the Revolution 0/1830 in France ... ... 524 

England ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 530 

France ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 531 

Germany, Italy 533 

Spain, Portugal, Greece, Turkey . ; . ... ... ... 534 

Russia ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 535 

From 1830 to the great Revolutionary Year, 1848 536 

France ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 536 

England ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 537 

Spain and Turkey 538 

France ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 539 

Spain, Sweden, Denmark ... ... ... ... ... 540 

Turkey, Italy ... ... ... ... ... ... 541 

Canada, India 541 

From the great Revolutionary Year, 1848, to the Crimean 

War, 1856 ... ... ... ... ... ... 541 

France ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 541 

Italy, Germany 545 

Italy, Switzerland, England 549 

United States of America ... ... ... ... ... 550 

Russia ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 550 

From the Crimean War, 1856, to the Overthrow of the 

Second French Empire, 1871... ... ... . . . 552 

Sepoy Mutiny 552 

Italy free 553 

French and English Interference in Syria 554 

Russia after the War 554 

War of Secession in the United States 555 

Germany and Schleswig-Holstein, Denmark 556 

Struggle for the Empire of Germany by Prussia and 

Austria 557 

Spain, France, England 557 

Greece 559 

Overthrow of the French Empire under Napoleon III.... 559 

From the Overthrow of the French Empire to 1 884 561 

Settlement of the German Empire 561 

Russian and Turkish War 561 

The Egyptian Outbreak 563 

The French in Madagascar and Tonquin 564 

Local Histories 565 



xxxvi Introduction to the Study of History. 

England Page 565 

France ... 567 

Germany ... 568 

Holland, Belgium, Austrian-Hungarian Empire, Italy ... 569 

Spain, Portugal, Russia, Greece, Turkey 570 

Denmark, Norway and Sweden ... ... ... ... 571 

Persia, India ... ... ... ... ... 571 

China, Japan ... ... ... ... ... ... 572- 

Korea, Egypt, Abyssinia, Morocco ... ... ... 573 

South and South-Western Africa, Liberia ... ... 573 

Zanzibar, Madagascar, the Pacific Islands 574 

Australasian Colonies, New Guinea, Borneo ... ... 574 

America and the Dominion of Canada ... ... ... 574 

Mexico, West Indies 575 

The Conclusion ... ... ... ... ... ... 575 

Ecclesiastical History 577 

Literary History ... ... ... ... .. ... 592 

Philosophy : 

English ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 601 

French 608 

German 609 

Italian 618 



PRELIMINARY NOTES, 



I. THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE 
ANCIENT NATIONS. 

II. THE ORIGINAL SEAT OF THE 
HUMAN RACE. 

III. THE UNITY OF THE HUMAN 
RACE. 



IV. THE DISPERSION OF THE EARLY 
FAMILIES OF THE HUMAN- 
RACE. 

V. LANGUAGE, AND THE VARIE- 
TIES OF LANGUAGE. 

VI. SUNDRY SPECULATIONS ON THE 
ORIGIN AND FORMER CON- 
DITION OF MAN. 



/. The Chronology of the Ancient Nations. 

i. To understand the order, the times, and dates of events, 
so as to be able to arrange the facts of the histories in regular 
succession and in correct relation to each other, is most 
important. Unfortunately we have no chronological system upon 
which we can depend before the tenth century previous to the 
Christian era. All earlier dates referring to a remote antiquity are 
mere guesses, generally shrewd, and approximately correct, but 
having no claim to certainty. The ancient nations had no common 
era or epoch. In the book of Genesis there are found fragments 
relating to the creation, the flood, the genealogies of the fathers of 
the human race, which probably have been handed down through 
the leading families of the race of Shem, and finally incorporated 
with the religious history of the Abrahamic family. Unfortunately 
the numbers of the years attached to the genealogies differ in the 
Hebrew, and in the Septuagint and Samaritan versions, all of them 
having been either incorrectly copied or purposely modified by way 
of correction by sundry editors. The true Biblical chronology is lost ; 
that which is found in our English Bibles is the work of Archbishop 
Usher, who follows the last recension of the Hebrew Bible, made 
about 600 A.D. by the Jewish Rabbins of Tiberias. This chronology 
is inconsistent with the early civilisation of Egypt in the time of 
Abraham as exhibited to us in the book of Genesis. Between these 
numbers and those of the Greek version (the Septuagint), made 
from a far more ancient text of the Hebrew, 250 B.C., there are great 

B 



2 Preliminary Notes. 

differences, but the extension of time given in this system does not 
meet the requirements of the well-attested histories of either Egypt 
or Chaldea. The Hebrew gives 1,616 years between the creation 
and the flood; the Septuagint, according to Hales, confirmed by 
Josephus, 2,262 years. Between the flood and the call of Abram, 
the Hebrew gives 292 years; Hales, from the Septuagint, 1,072 
years; the Samaritan, 972 years. Among the inconsistencies and 
impossibilities of Usher's system may be noticed, that it makes 
Noah and Abram contemporaries, the former living up to the fifty- 
eighth year of the latter, and Shem living up to the hundred and 
tenth year of Isaac and the fiftieth of Jacob, so that, according to 
these systems of chronology, the building of Babel and the general 
spread of idolatry took place in the time of Noah. 1 The system 
of Hales, corrected by Dr. Russell, 2 appears to come nearest to the 
truth. Recently F. R. and C R. Conder have thrown much light 
upon the chronology of the Israelitish history. 3 The variations of 
the chronological systems will be seen in the following table : 





B.C. 


B.C. 


B.C. 


B.C. 


B.C. 




Usher. 


Hales. 


Bunsen. 


Bunsen, Jr. 


Conder. 


The Creation 


4,004 


... 5,441 


... 20,000 ... 


10,500 . 





The Flood 


2,348 


- 3,155 


... 10,000 ... 


2,360 . 




The Call of Abram... 


1,961 


... 2,078 


... 2,870 ... 


1,993 


,. 1,186 


The Exode from 












Ezvut . . . 


I.4QI 


.. 1,648 


1,120 .. 


I.S63 


I.U1 



The Building of Solo- 
mon's Temple 1,012 ... 1,027 ... 1,040 ... 971 ... 1,007 

These great differences are of little importance practically, as 
they are the largest in reference to pre-historic times, which are 
almost unknown to us; after the tenth century B.C., the chrono- 
logists in the main agree; our information respecting the early 
history of the world until the sixth century B.C. is. mainly drawn 
from the books of the Old Testament. The earliest Greek historian 
extant is Herodotus, who lived so late as 400 B.C., while Moses 
lived 1500 to 1600 B.C. Within the last generation, the discoveries 
in Egypt and in the valleys of the Euphrates and Tigris have 
opened out to us a new revelation of the past history of Egypt, 
Assyria, Babylon, Persia, and the East. In the course of another 
generation we may confidently expect still further discoveries, 
through the labours of our learned Egyptologists and Assyriologists. 

1 Hales' "Analysis of Ancient Chronology," 4 vols. 8vo. 

9 Russell's " Connexion of Sacred and Profane History," 3 vols. 8vo. 

3 Conder's " Hand-book to the Bible," crown 8vo. 



Chronology of the Ancient Nations. 3 

What the Greeks thought of their past history, as to their antiquity, 
is to be seen in the Arundelian marbles, which profess to give the 
exact dates of the most remote events in their legendary history 
(B.C. 300-200). The Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions give us 
their estimate of the past history of their races. We take these as 
probable guides, not as infallible ones. 

2. The extraordinary claims to antiquity on the part of certain 
Eastern nations and Egypt are common to all ancient races, with 
the marked exception of the Israelitish people. We may safely set 
aside the periods of hundreds of thousands of years in which gods 
and mythical personages figure in the annals of Egypt and Babylon, 
for instance; these chronological systems, no doubt, originated in the 
calculation of astronomical cycles, just as we can calculate the past 
appearance of the comets. The Egyptian basis for their chronology 
was the Sothic period of 1,461 years, in which the rising of the Dog- 
star again coincided with the beginning of their civic year, 2oth 
July; the priests comprised the whole duration of the world in 251 
Sothic periods equal to 36,525 years, during which period they 
thought that the sun had twice risen in the west, and had twice set in 
the east. Manetho, the Egyptian priest (whose work is lost, extracts 
only having been preserved, the dates being evidently altered and 
amended to suit chronological theories), has given us lists of kings and 
dynasties ; the monuments of Egypt and the papyri of Turin con- 
firm the accuracy of the names of the kings and of the dynasties 
as given by Manetho, and, to some extent, the order of their 
succession. "The very thorough investigation to which learned 
experts have subjected the succession of the Pharaohs, and the 
chronological order of the dynasties, have shown the absolute 
necessity of supposing in the lists of Manetho contemporary and 
collateral dynasties, and thus of diminishing considerably the total 
duration of the dynasties. From the nature of the calculations, 
based on the exact determination of the regnal years of the kings, 
every number which is rectified necessarily changes the results of 
the whole series of numbers. It is only from the beginning of the 
twenty-sixth dynasty (666 B.C.) that the chronology is founded on 
data which leave little to be desired as to their certitude." 1 Another 
eminent Egyptologist-, Mariette Bey, tells us "that the greatest of 
all the obstacles in the way of establishing a regular Egyptian 
chronology is the fact that the Egyptians themselves never had any 
chronology at all; the use of a fixed era was unknown, and it has not 

l Brugsch-Bey, " History of Egypt," vol. I. pp. 31, 32. 
B 2 



4 Preliminary Notes. 

yet been proved that they had any other reckoning than the years of 
the reigning monarch." J If we compare the lists of Manetho with 
those found on the Turin papyri, and in the tablets of Abydos and 
Sakkara, the conviction is forced upon us that all these are mere 
attempts to reduce a chronological chaos of disconnected dates into 
a form acceptable to priestly and royal vanity. The impossibility of 
arriving at satisfactory results in the absence of satisfactory data is 
obvious, when we notice the contradictions in the systems of the 
learned Egyptologists, in which between the highest arid the lowest 
date of the reign of Menes (the first king of Egypt) there is a 
difference of 3,000 years ! 



B.C. 



Boekh 5,702 

Unger 5,613 

Mariette and Lenormant 5j4 

Brugsch-Bey 4,455 

R. S. Poole 2,717 



B.C. 

Lauth 4>i57 

Lepsius 3*892 

Bunsen (his early opinion) 3*673 

,, (his later date) 3,059 

Wilkinson 2,691 



The Babylonish chronology of Berosus, setting aside the mythical 
period, is comparatively sober and rational. Baron Bunsen in his 
speculations has convinced himself that a Turanian dynasty was 
reigning in Babylon 7,000 to 8,000 years before our era, of which 
there is not a shadow of proof. Recent discoveries in Babylonia of 
a Sargon who lived 3,800 B.C. are less improbable, though not yet 
proved. We may exhibit the uncertainty of Egyptian chronology 
by a reference to the difference in the dates given for the invasion 
of Egypt by the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings and for their expulsion ; 
in the one case 213 years, in the latter 183 years. 

The Invasion of the Hyksos. 

B.C. 

Lenormant and Mariette 2,214 

Brugsch 2,233 

Lepsius.- 2,101 

Bunsen 2,070 

Poole 2,080 

Wilkinson 2,020 



The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the 
beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty. 

B.C. 

Lenormant and Mariette ,703 

Brugsch...., ,700 

Lepsius ,591 

Bunsen ,633 

Pcole ,525 

Wilkinson ,520 



Wej have no reasonable grounds for placing the civilisation of 
Egypt higher than that of the Babylonians and Chaldeans. To 
suppose that Egypt existed as a powerful kingdom for 3,000 or 4,000 
years before the commencement of the eighteenth dynasty, and that 
during that long period her rulers had confined themselves to the 



1 Lenormant, " Manual of Ancient History," vol. i. p. 198. 



The Original Seat of the Human Race after the Flood. 5 

occupancy of the peninsula of Sinai and the conquest of some petty 
tribes on the south, and that North Africa remained unmolested, 
and that the rivalry with the states in the valley of the Euphrates 
had not, until before 1300 or 1400 B.C. commenced, is not probable. 
We do notice a change in the kings of the eighteenth dynasty 
from 1700 B.C. It is most probable that all the dynasties, or most 
of them before the arrival of the Hyksos, were contemporary, and 
that Menes began his reign 2700 B.C., 3,000 years later than the 
period assigned by Boekh. Suppose that the kings of the heptarchy 
in England had been arranged as consecutive successors of Hengist 
and Horsa instead of being arranged as contemporaries, the Egbert 
of our history (827 A.D.) might be made to rule over a monarchy of 
2,000 or 3,000 years instead of 400 years. 

II. The Original Seat of the Human Race after the Flood. 

i. It is reasonable to suppose that, under providential guidance, 
this locality would be one in which the conditions of soil, climate, 
vegetable productions, and fitness for animal life existed. No 
region in the world combines all these recommendations so fully as 
the table-land bordering on the central range of Ararat, extending, 
from Armenia to the Hindu Kosh, a plateau raised above the 
lacustrine impurities and morasses of the slowly-draining plains as 
left by the deluge. All tradition points to this district. On the 
supposition that mankind spread from this position, we may har- 
monise every linguistic phenomenon, and explain every ethnogra- 
phical fact, and the farther we depart in any direction the greater 
are the difficulties in which we find ourselves entangled. As for 
those who contend that man was created independently in different 
parts of the globe, it is sufficient to say that such an hypothesis is 
unnecessary, since the spread of population can be accounted for in 
a very satisfactory manner without the assumption of more than one 
starting-point, and the differences of race observable in different 
parts of the globe are not differences of species inconsistent with 
one common origin. Such an hypothesis would leave unexplained 
and inexplicable the proofs of an original identity of language, to 
which philology is daily making additions of the greatest weight and 
importance. These views, expressed by Dr. Donaldson, 1 are valuable 
as coming from a learned rationalistic divine, with no special pre- 
judice in favour of orthodoxy whether in theology or criticism. On 
this table-land mankind remained and multiplied for some centuries, 

' "New Cratylus," second eel., p. 99. 



(5 Preliminary Notes. 

retaining, and possibly adding to, the arts and civilisation inherited 
from the antediluvian world, and enjoying the comforts and con- 
veniences of agricultural life. The great mountain-range " Ararat" 
afforded many localities from which, at different points, the leading 
branches of the human family may have begun their occupancy of 
the face of the earth either southward, westward, eastward, or north- 
ward, each branch of adventurous explorers retaining for generations 
the remembrance of the primitive home ; and so it is that many of 
the western Asiatics point to the ranges of Armenia, while the 
Hindu races point to the Hindu Kosh as the home of the patriarchs 
of their race. As these migrations consisted of men who had 
retained the knowledge of the useful arts and of the civilisation of 
the old world, we can better account for the early advancement of 
society in Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt, &c. 

2. It is possible for us to form some notion of the condition of 
society among the Indo-European races on the table-land, before 
their dispersion, by the help of philology applied principally to the 
language of these races of the stock of Japhet. "We find in the 
Aryan, Greek, Italic, Letto-Sclavonic, Germanic, and Keltic languages 
words the roots of which must be considered as a common posses- 
sion acquired before the separation, from which we can discover 
their then stage of life. Here are common terms for members of 
the family father, mother, son, and daughter (the milker) ; for 
house, yard, garden, citadel ; common words for horses, cattle, dogs, 
swine, sheep, goats, mice, geese, ducks ; common roots for wool, 
hemp, flax, corn (wheat, spelt, or barley) ; for ploughing, grinding, 
and weaving ; for certain metals, copper or iron ; for some weapons 
and tools ; for wagon, boat, and rudder ; for the elementary 
numbers and the divisions of the year according to the moon : all 
these words imply a civilisation of the Indo-European races adapted 
to their agricultural and pastoral life." * There are other words also, 
such as king, law, temple, palaces, shops, carriages, high-roads, 
bridges, which belong to an after-period in the Aryan culture after 
the removal from the table-land (Max Miiller, " Lectures," p. 34). 
Thus it is evident that civilised life is the original normal condition 
of man, while barbarism is the loss (by disuse) of the original 
culture and arts of the race, by irregular offshoots, the wanderers, 
the backwoodsmen of the primitive civilised centres. The remains 
of these outcasts have been recognised, and inferences drawn that 
the primitive man_was a savage, existing as the Samoeids of Asia 

1 Max-Duncker, "Hist, of Antiquity," vol. iv. pp. 2, 3. 



The Original Seat of the Human Race after the Flood. 7 

and the Esquimaux of America; but this generalisation from 
exceptional premises is most unsatisfactory. " We may also dismiss 
the fanciful speculations respecting a stone period, and a bronze 
period, and an iron period, as applied to a theory of the progress of 
the human race from barbarism to civilisation. So far as the oldest 
records tell us, the human family, in its earliest stages of progress, 
possessed the use of the metals necessary for building, for hunting, 
a-nd for agriculture ; and the fact of the existence of isolated com- 
munities in the degradation of savage life is no proof of the general 
uncivilised condition of the parent stock." 1 It is amusing to read 
such remarks as the following, founded on an assumption of the 
barbarous condition of the first human families : " Men must even 
have made considerable progress towards civilisation before they 
acquired the idea of property, and ascertain it so perfectly as to be 
acquainted with the most simple of all contracts, that of exchanging 
by barter one rude commodity for another." 2 Wherever were men 
found who did not know the difference between mine and thine^ and 
were unable to make exchanges ? 

3. Physical causes probably contributed to delay the general 
separation of the human race for some centuries. In the opinion 
of some geologists, the inland seas of Aral, the Caspian, and the 
Euxine, with the Sea of Azoph, formed originally one vast expanse 
of water, spreading over the plains of northern Asia and eastern 
Europe to the Baltic Sea and its gulfs. Gradually, through the 
elevation of these plains and by the breaking open of a passage for 
these waters through the narrow channel of the Hellespont into the 
Mediterranean, these inland seas were restrained within their present 
limits, and thus the plains of eastern Europe to the Baltic, and 
those of Asia to the Arctic Ocean, became dry land. This change 
may be referred to as the event which signalised the life of Peleg 
(2754 B.C., Genesis x. 25). It is all but certain that central and 
northern Europe were not occupied until long after the valleys of the 
Euphrates and Nile and the eastern coasts of the Mediterranean. 
With some few exceptions, as in Chaldea and Egypt, the migrating 
tribes, gradually dispersed, continued for ages to live a nomad life, 
not altogether neglecting agriculture, a mode of life most natural 
and agreeable to a sparse population with the whole earth open for 
pasturage. Even in our day, in all Asia west of the Indus, the open 
plains north of the Caspian, and the plateau of Persia, and the 

1 Donaldson, "New Cratylus," p. 99. 

2 Robertson, "Hist, of America," vol. i. p. 3. 



g Preliminary Notes. 

plains of Asiatic Turkey are occupied by shepherd tribes, while the 
banks of rivers have become the seats of a settled agricultural 
population. We need not wonder that collisions between tribes 
coveting the richer and best-.'watered pasturages, or envying the 
wealth and comfort of the agricultural communities, would frequently 
occur. Various stages of civilisation then, as now, existed in the 
same territory, as the Hunter [State, the Shepherd State, the rude 
beginnings of cultivation on partially cleared lands, and the more 
perfect tillage of the experienced agriculturalist. In these migrations 
the pure Theistical faith of the Patriarchal families became corrupted, 
and by degrees was lost, superseded by Polytheistic notions, com- 
bined with Atheistic and Pantheistic speculations. Much, too, of the 
civilisation of the Patriarchal age was forgotten, through disuse, in 
the transition state from settled to nomad life ; here and there were 
small offshoots of the human family sinking into absolute barbarism 
by their disconnexion with the main stock. But barbarism is not 
(as has been assumed by some) the original state of the human race. 
All our researches point to an early simple civilisation, improved by 
some races and neglected by others, according to the differing 
circumstances in which they were placed in the course of their 
migrations. So also with respect to religion. Ebrard and others 
have proved that, " if we pursue the religious history of the civilised 
nations of antiquity, we find .... in proportion as we ascend into 
the past, a greater approximation to the knowledge of the one living 
holy God, in conjunction with a more vivid ethical consciousness of 
the difference between good and evil." 1 Lenormant recognises 
" in the annals of humanity the development of a providential plan 
running through all ages and all vicissitudes of society .... thus, 
above all, it is that I am almost invincibly attached to the doctrine 
of the constant and unlimited progress of humanity, a doctrine 
unknown to Paganism, a doctrine born of Christianity." 2 

HI. The Unity of the Human Race. 

i. Place together a specimen of the most perfect of the Caucasian 
races and a specimen of the most degraded races, the Bosjeman of 
South Africa or the aborigines of Australia, and it will then appear 
difficult to admit the usual interpretation of the text, Acts xvii. 26, 
in which St. Paul affirms that God " made of one blood all nations af 
men to dwell on all the face of the earth." But, on the other hand, 

"British and Foreign Evangelical Review," vol. xxix. p. 50. 
Lenormant, vol. i. p. 16. 



The Unity of the Human Race. 9 

arrange in one line specimens of all the races beginning with the 
highest down to the very lowest, the transition is so gradual, and, 
in some cases, so imperceptible, that no one can reasonably doubt 
the relation of each specimen to its predecessors and its successors 
in the line, and the fact of the oneness, the unity of the race. " It 
is not possible to establish a well-defined separation between the 
separate races of men which graduate insensibly one into the 
other." 1 Physiologists generally agree in the opinion that the struc- 
tural differences which are found in the separate races of mankind 
coincide with similar varieties in the animal world, in the case of 
certain domestic animals, as the dog, the swine, the horse, horned 
cattle, sheep, goats, of each of which races there are a great number 
of varieties, but all traceable to an original stock. Some of these 
varieties have arisen within a brief period. For instance, the swine 
taken to America by the Spaniards in the fifteenth and sixteenth 
centuries, have produced varieties widely differing from the parent 
stock and from each other. In respect also to colour there is a 
perfect analogy in the changes which take place in domestic animals 
and men. There is no organic difference between the skin of the 
European and that of other races (the negro) such as would lead us 
to imagine a diversity of species in mankind. 2 In the negro the 
darkened colour of the skin and the excessive development of the 
black mucous secretion (pigment) which forms under the epidermis, 
is unquestionably an effect of a burning climate and of a sun-power 
operating for ages on successive generations (Lenormant), though 
other causes may have also been in operation. 

2. The theory of the evolution of all species from one original, 
probable enough within certain limits, is thoroughly opposed to the 
once popular theory of generic differences of the races of mankind, 
and of separate creations of each race. 

3. To those that believe in the divine providential guidance of 
the human race, it will not be difficult to suppose that the variations 
in the physique of the different races of men have gradually grown, 
according to a mercifully-designed natural law, to fit them to enjoy 
life in the climates in which we find them existing. In the black 
races in Africa, and elsewhere, there is a large variety of types, 
some scarcely distinguishable from the southern European of Spain 
or Italy, and others widely removed from the highest type. 

4. "It is true that there are great outward bodily differences 

1 Lenormant, "Manual of Ancient History," vol. i. p. 49. 

2 Prichard's "Natural History of Man." 



I0 Preliminary Notes. 

between the different races of men, and that there have been found 
some advocates for materialism who ignore the spiritual indications 
of unity, and deny the claim of the inhabitants of Africa to rank 
with Europeans as the same animal. But a more enlightened 
research has triumphed over all these difficulties, and it is now seen 
that the physical differences of the races spread over the earth's 
surface are explicable from secondary causes, on the hypothesis of a 
primeval identity of origin, and a subsequent dispersion of emigrants 
from the home of their family ; and that we may account in the 
same manner for those differences in intellectual development which 
correspond to the physical differences of nations." 1 

IV. The Dispersion. 

i. We know nothing of the time when the dispersion of the 
human family began, or of the circumstances under which it was 
conducted. In all probability it was orderly and in accordance with 
the existing patriarchal organisations, " according to their genera- 
tions in their nations" (Gen. x.). The family had grown into a 
tribe, and the ordinary step towards the formation of the nation was 
by an amalgamation of tribes. Before the general dispersion, there 
had no doubt been many isolated departures of individuals and 
families, who, thus separated from the civilised parent stock, soon 
lost the habits and arts of civilised life and relapsed into savageism ; 
the remains of some of the exceptional specimens of the race have 
led some of the learned to form theories founded on the original 
low, savage, and brutal condition of the first men ; theories opposed 
by all the facts of accredited history. 

2 V Certain races which ethnologists term Turanian defy classifica- 
tion; the name is derived from the word Turan ("land of dark- 
ness "), applied to the lands north of the Caucasus and the Oxus. 
These races, however, were (some of them at least) farther 
advanced in the arts of civilised life than their contemporaries ; their 
language may have been the original speech of the human family, 
that which was " confounded " at Shinar (Gen. xi. 9), and thus 
broken into a large number of dialects, varying in their vocabulary, 
but all distinguished by the principle of agglutination which pervades 
their grammatical structure. In the earliest periods of the history 
of the human family, this form of speech seems to have prevailed 
over Asia, from the Caucasus to the Indian Ocean, and from the 

1 Donaldson, "New Cratylus," p. 70. 



The Dispersion. 1 1 

Mediterranean to the mouth of the Ganges and to Cape Comorin. 
The first settlers in Europe, the Laps, Fins, Esths, Tshudes, 
Basques, spoke dialects of this type. So also the Cushites of Arabia 
and eastern Africa, and the original Mizraim in Egypt. We may 
infer with some reason that these Turanians formed the advance of 
the emigration in the general dispersion, and that they belonged 
chiefly to the Hamite and Japetan branches of the human family. 
Some philologists regard the Shemitish and Indo-European class of 
languages as developments from this original Turanian. In the course 
of time Shemitish and Indo-European languages largely supplanted 
the Turanian. 

3. The SHEMITISH tribes appeared to have followed long after the 
Turanians, and to have been to a large extent intermingled with 
them in Chaldea, Mesopotamia, and Syria. The bulk of the JAPETAN 
tribes appear to have been restrained, for some ages, by physical 
difficulties already noticed; possibly the fathers of the Tartar, 
Mongolian races had departed north-eastward long before the other 
families of this race had begun their migration. We may infer six 
distinct migrating movements. The first > that of the KELTIC races ; 
the second, that of the TEUTONIC (German) races ; the third (it may 
be in point of time the second), that of the PELASGIC races, the 
fathers and predecessors of the Italic, Hellenic, Illyrian and Thracian 
people. Some suppose this migration to have passed through Asia 
Minor, and to have left the lonians on the Egean before they crossed 
the Hellespont into Europe, while others favour the passage by the 
north of the Black Sea. The fourth was the settlement of the 
ARYANS in PERSIA and Central Asia, about 2000 B.C. ; the fifth was 
the movement of the EASTERN ARYANS into the Punjaub (INDIA), 
and their subsequent occupation of all India north of the Dekkan ; 
the sixth, the SCLAVONIC races. This sketch is in accordance with 
facts at present known to us, but in the changes which follow these 
migrations, in which the law of the strongest set aside the claims of 
the first comers, many exceptions difficult to reconcile with this 
scheme, or, in fact, with any scheme, may be noticed by historians. 
The settlement of the Mizraim and others of the family of HAM in 
Egypt and Africa, is by some of the learned connected with the 
Turanian migration, with which the Karaites were largely identified. 

In the opinion of Dr. Donaldson, founded purely on philological 
considerations, the intermingling of some Sclavonic and Germanic 
tribes produced the Lithuanians and the Pelasgi. While one branch 
of the Germans (the low) took possession of Scandinavia, the other 
branch (the high) were the progenitors of the Hellenes or Dorians, 



I2 Preliminary Notes. 

who settled on the highlands to the north of Greece. The Pelasgi 
first followed and superseded the Keltic races in Italy and Greece. 
In Italy there followed a Lithuanian settlement, and in Greece that 
of the Hellenes. Our great historian, E. A. Freeman, regards the 
Basques, Iberians, Ligurians, and Sikanians, and possibly the 
Etruscans, as fragments of a vast pre-Aryan race, perhaps of BERBER 
(African) origin. The Hellenic and Italic races, with the races akin 
to them, Sikels, Thracians, Epirots, Illyrians, were the first of the 
ARYAN migrations into Europe known to history. Coeval with these 
the KELTS were pressing their way through the solid central Europe ; 
they were the vanguard of the Aryan migration, within their own range, 
and the first swarm which made its way to the Atlantic, exterminating 
or absorbing their Iberian and other predecessors (generally called 
Turanians by ethnologists). After these came the TEUTONS, the 
Germanic races, who pressed on the Kelts from the east, and in their 
wake the SCLAVONIANS. The LITHUANIANS, generally regarded as 
Sclavonians, are remarkable as a people whose tongue comes nearest 
of any to the Aryan model. 

All these are speculations to be respectfully received as coming 
from men of undoubted learning and research. The first volume of 
"Herodotus," translated by Rawlinson, fourth edition, 1880, pp. 
668-702 ; the two great works of Donaldson, the " New Cratylus" and 
" Varronianus," and the invaluable work of Freeman, on the " Historic 
Geography of Europe," are the safest guides to the ethnologist. 

V. Language and the Varieties of Language. 

i. Some of the learned regard language as of purely human 
invention. Languages no doubt grow and enlarge with the human 
mind ; but language itself is the distinctive gift of God to the human 
race, exercised by the first man in giving names to external things, 
and in the expression of thought and feeling. " The most profound 
and highly gifted of these philosophers (William von Humboldt), 
who have devoted themselves to this study, have inferred that 
language is the necessary and spontaneous result of man's constitution, 
that human speech and human nature are inseparable, and conse- 
quently that language was originally one." * " If any one thing more 
than another can show the absurdity of those who speak of an 
invented language, it is simply this fact, that the oldest languages are 
always the richest in materials, the most perfect in analogy, the most 
uniform in etymological organisation. Philology, too, instructs us 

1 Donaldson, " New Cratylus" p. 79. 



Language and tJie Varieties of Language. 13 

that those very words which the believer in an invented language 
regards as the most difficult to invent, and, therefore, as the last 
introduced are in fact the basis of all languages \ for instance, the 
pronouns and numerals, which Adam Smith considers of recent 
introduction, are known to have been the very oldest part of every 
tongue, for it is just these words which retain their identity in 
languages which have been longest separate, and have therefore 
become most unlike in other particulars." 1 With the Shcmitic and 
Indo-European class of languages philologists are familiar. With the 
Turanian our acquaintance is limited.- Some suppose that all these 
diverse languages originated at once in Shinar after the building of 
Babel, in the first confusion of tongues (Gen. xi. 7-9), and that the 
regularly-formed tongue of Shem and Japhet were exempted from this 
change ; others would trace all these and other varieties of human 
speech to a gradual modification of the Turanian, the original 
language which began at Shinar. These views are not necessarily 
contradictory. 

2. There are some popular theories advocated in our serial 
literature bearing on the languages and ethnology of the early nations, 
which, though plausible, have never retained their position in public 
opinion. One theory is that of a pre-Adamite race ; another is that 
of limiting the action of the deluge to the race of Seth. Lenormant, 
McCausland, and R. S. Poole, all of them believers in revelation, 
favour these theories, and consider them capable of scriptural proof. 
In the opinion of the majority of our archaeologists these hypotheses 
create more difficulties than they remove. 

3. The learned philologists of Europe have, in the present century, 
overcome the apparently impossible task of deciphering and translat- 
ing the hieroglyphical inscriptions of Egypt, and the cuneiform arrow- 
headed characters of Assyria and Babylonia. The Rosetta stone, a 
monument in honour of Ptolemy V., 200 B.C., was discovered by the 
French in Rosetta, 1798; it was captured by the British troops in 1801, 
and presented by George III. to the British Museum. This stone, 
having three inscriptions, one hieroglyphical, another Demotic, and 



1 Donaldson, "New Cratylus," p. 80. 

* Of one of these languages, the Kaffir (South Africa), I can speak with some 
confidence, having, fifty years ago, formed the first grammar ("The Kaffir 
Language," 4to, 1834); this was followed by enlarged and improved editions by 
W. J. Davis, and at length followed by the exhaustive grammar of J. W. Apple- 
yard (8vo.). In the composition of this first grammar I had the benefit of the 
help of a clever youth, since known as Sir Theophilus Shepstone, to whom the 
Kaffir language was as familiar as his mother-tongue. 



j^ Preliminary Notes. 

the third Greek, afforded material for the commencement of a 
scientific study, which resulted in the successful interpretation of 
the Egyptian inscriptions. By Dr. Young in 1818, and by Cham- 
pollion in 1822-1830, the foundations of the science of Egyptology 
were laid. Since then Bunsen, De Rouge, Marietta, Lepsius, Bird, 
Poole, Lenormant, and others have laboured diligently in these 
investigations. The cuneiform, arrow-headed, wedge-like characters, 
first invented by the Sumir Akkads of Chaldea first attracted the 
notice of Grotefend in Germany some eighty years ago. Long- 
perier and De Saulcy, influenced by the excavations of Botta and 
Layard at Nineveh, took up the inquiry. Sir H. Rawlinson, Dr. 
Hincks, and Jules Oppert devoted themselves to the investigation of 
the inscriptions on the stone in Behistan, made by order of Darius 
Hystaspes. The three languages, Assyrian, Persian, and Akkadian 
were deciphered and translated to the satisfaction of the learned. The 
process by which these wonderful results have been accomplished is 
fully explained in Mahaffy's "Prolegomena to Ancient History," 1 and 
by Heeren, Rawlinson, and others. The Coptic dialect of the old 
Egyptian, the Zend (old Persian), and the Hebrew, Chaldee, and 
Arabic languages were available for the explanation of the meanings 
of the words when deciphered. 

VI. Sundry Speculations on the Origin and former 
Condition of Man. 

i. Believing in the revelation given to our race, recorded in the 
book of Genesis, the writer of this work attaches no importance to 
recent speculations by which that revelation has been ignored or 
contradicted, but the fact of sundry theories, opposed to the Biblical 
account, and the discussion of these theories, require to be noticed. 
As far as possible, the following is a classification of the leading 
works on the subjects : (a.) ON THE ORIGIN AND EARLY CONDI- 
TION OF THE RACE. Geological Evidence of the Antiquity of Man, 
4th edition, Svo., 1873 (Sir Chas. Lyell). Primaeval Man, 121110., 
1869 (Duke of Argyll). Evidences as to Man's Place in Nature, 
8vo., 1868 (T. H. Huxley). The Descent of Man, 2 vols., 8vo., 
1871 (E. Darwin). The Recent Origin of Man, 8vo., 1875 (J- C. 
Southall). Pre-historic Times, 8vo., 1878 ; Origin of Civilisation and 
Primitive Condition of Man, 8vo., 1870 (Sir J. Lubbock). The 
Age of Man, Geologically considered, i8mo., 1866 (John Kirk). 

1 "Prolegom. to Ancient History," 8vo., 1870, pp. 96-112. 



Sundry Speculations on the Origin of Man. 1 5 

Archaia, 8vo., 1860; Origin of the World, 8vo., 1877; Life Dawn 
on Earth, 8vo., 1875 ; Fossil Men, 8vo., 1875 (J. W. Dawson). 
(.) ON THE DIFFERENCE OF THE RACES OF MANKIND. Natural 
History of Man, 2 vols., royal 8vo., 1855; Physical History of 
Mankind, 5 vols., Svo., 1841-47 (J. R. Prichard). Genesis of the 
Earth and Man, 8vo., 1863 (R. S. Poole). Adam and the Adamites, 
i2mo., 1864; Builders of Babel, 121110., 1871 (D. McCausland). 
Natural History of the Varieties of Mankind, 8vo., 1850 ; Descriptive 
Ethnology, 2 vols., 1859; Man and his Migrations, i2mo., 1851 
(R. G. Latham). 

2. The speculations on the ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE, the VARIETIES of 
human speech, their differences, and their affinities have created an 
extensive literature, from which the following may be selected : 
Hermes, 8vo., (J. Harris). Diversions of Purley, 2 vols., 8vo., 
1829 (J. Home Tooke). Language and the Study of Language, 
8vo., 1868 (W. D. Whitney). Elements of Comparative Philology, 
8vo., 1862 (R. G. Latham). Philosophy of Life and Language, 
i2mo., 1847 (F- von Schlegel). Varronianus, and the New Cratylus, 
1844-50 (J. W. Donaldson). Lectures on the Science of Language, 
2 vols., 8vo., 1871 On the Stratification of Language, Svo., 1868; 
Chips from a German Workshop, 3 vols., 8vo., 1867-8 (Max-Miiller). 
Principles of Comparative Philology, 8vo., 1874 (A. H. Sayce). 

3. These lists are but a small selection from a large body of 
valuable works ; they are, however, sufficient to exhibit the various 
opinions held by the learned on the subjects to which they refer, and 
with respect to which it is desirable for educated men to have some 
acquaintance. 



FIRST PERIOD, 



The Earliest Nations ^tp to 1000 B.C. 



i. BEFORE the discoveries of the last half-century, our knowledge 
of the early history of Egypt and of Western Asia was confined to* 
very valuable but fragmentary notices in the Old Testament, and im 
the remains of Berosus and Manetho. The writings of Herodotus, 
Ctesias, Diodorus and others tended rather to mislead than to- 
inform the historical inquirer. Now, by the persevering labours of 
our learned archaeological experts, in connexion with our laborious 
excavators, the monumental remains of Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria 
have been opened to the investigation of the philologists of Europe, 
by whose patient industry and critical acumen we are placed in a 
position to understand more definitely the state of the ancient world. 
The history of Egypt is becoming a reality; the fables of Ctesias are 
no longer quoted as resting upon traditional or national records;, 
while the actual condition of Babylonia, Chaldea, and Assyria can be 
read in the brick tablets found in the mounds on the Euphrates and' 
Tigris. What has been taught us from these sources may be with con- 
fidence regarded as substantially true, after making some allowance^ 
for the influence of national vanity, and of party feeling, the existence' 
of which was as evidently manifested in the most remote antiquity 
as in our day. "It is one thing to decipher inscriptions and 
hieroglyphs, but quite another thing to determine their exact value 
when deciphered" (see the Spectator, Dec. 22, 1883). Monumental 
statements are by no means decisive as to facts, but must be tested 
by other evidences. 

2. While, however, these discoveries refer mainly to nations 

c 



l8 First Period. 

located between the east and south-east of the Mediterranean and 
the rivers Euphrates and Tigris, which flow into the Persian Gulf, we 
must not lose sight of the fact that the Mediterranean Sea is the 
real centre of the ancient world. Mommsen truly remarks, The 
Mediterranean Sea .... at once separates and connects the three 
divisions of the old world. The shores of this inland sea were m 
ancient times peopled by various nations, belonging, in an ethno- 
crraphical and philological point of view, to different races, but 
constituting in their historical aspect one whole. This historic 
whole has been usually, but not very appropriately entitled^ the 
history of the ancient world. It is, in reality, the history of civilisa- 
tion among the Mediterranean nations ; and, as it passes before us 
in its successive stages, it presents four great phases of development, 
the history of the Coptic or Egyptian stock dwelling on the southern 
shore ; the history of the Aramean or Syrian nation, which occupied 
the east coast, and extended into the interior of Asia, as far as the 
Euphrates and Tigris; and the histories of the twin peoples,- the 
Hellenes and Italians, who received as their heritage the countries 

bordering on its European shores So far, therefore, as 

cycles of culture admit of demarcation at all, we may record 
that cycle as an unity which has its culminating points, denoted 
by the names Thebes, Carthage, Athens, and Rome." 1 We may 
add to these "culminating points," so closely connected with 
the Mediterranean, the additional names of Babylon, Nineveh, 
Phoenicia, and Israel (Tyre and Jerusalem). These nations in 
due course finished their work, after which, "new peoples who 
hitherto had only laved the territories of the states of the Mediter- 
ranean overflowed both its shores, severed the history of its south 
coast from that of the north, and transferred the centre of civilisa- 
tion from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic Ocean. The distinction 
between ancient and modern history, therefore, is no mere accident, 
nor yet a mere matter of chronological convenience. What is called 
modern history is, in reality, the formation of a new cycle of culture, 
connected at several epochs of its development with the perishing 
or perished civilisation of the Mediterranean states, as that was con- 
nected with the primitive civilisation of the Indo-Germanic stock, 
but destined, like that earlier cycle, to traverse an orbit of its own." 3 
3. The earliest seats of civilisation are admitted to be the valleys 
and rich alluvial deposits of the rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris, 
which empty themselves into the Persian Gulf, and the valley of 

1 Mcmrasen, " History of Rome," vol. i. pp. 3, 4. 2 Ibid. p. 4. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 19 

the Nile. This latter river, conveying in its floods the fertile soils 
from the plains and mountains of Central Africa, has created the 
narrow strip of cultivatable land, hemmed in by the sandy desert 
for two or three miles on each side of the river, and then widening 
into a Delta formed by the various channels through which the 
mighty and once mysterious river reaches the Mediterranean : thus 
was formed the land of Egypt. So also are the Euphrates and 
Tigris ; cultivation is mainly confined to their banks. The vast 
plain bordering on these banks, and which extends between these 
rivers to the Persian Gulf, forms a rich pasturage for cattle. One 
immense desert, beginning with the Saharan waste, which touches 
the Atlantic Ocean, and then eastward reaches as far as the Yellow Sea, 
crosses the- eastern hemisphere. It is only interrupted by the valley 
of the Nile, by a narrow slip of land on the east of the Mediter- 
ranean, and again by the more extensive valleys of the Euphrates 
and Tigris. West of the Nile and the immediate west of the 
Euphrates, are mere seas of sand, scarcely above the level of the 
ocean. To the east of the Euphrates and Tigris the desert consists, 
for the most part, of a series of terraced plateaux, from three to ten 
thousand feet above the sea level. The land in the vicinity of these 
rivers is inundated yearly, and, being kept watered by canals in 
ancient times, produced rice and barley with an increase of two 
hundred for one. The southern plain of Chaldea is a land of 
incomparable fertility, yielding its fruits almost without labour ; thus 
it is that in these plains all the races of the ancient world have 
successively encountered each other. Babylon and Memphis have 
been the two great centres of civilisation, though Babylon claims, 
with reason, the priority ; they have even been rivals ; the struggles 
of Egypt for superiority over the empires of Assyria and Babylonia, 
and the re-action of the strife, constitutes the military history of these 
ancient nations, until Alexander the Great united both under one 
government. 1 

4. It is not, therefore, surprising to find, from the notices in the 
book of Genesis and from the universal testimony of the historical 
traditions preserved by the Greeks, that the earliest attempts in the 
formation of distinct national governments were made in the plains 
bordering on the Euphrates, and in the valley of the Nile. 

BABYLONIA, CHALDEA, THE PLAINS OF SHINAR. The mythical 
history of Berosus, which traces the antiquity of the Babylonian 
kingdom to about 36,000 years before the Persian Conquest, may be 

1 Lenormant, " Ancient History of the East," vol. i. pp. 339-341, abridged. 

C 2 



2D First Period. 

safely disregarded, although his later dynasties are more reconcil- 
able with the facts recorded in the brick tablets. That a Cushite 
kingdom was established at Babel by Nimrod is certain from 
Genesis x. 10 ; the entire plain of Chaldea was filled by a Turanian 
population, supposed to have come from the east of Lake Aral ; the 
Sumirs in the south and the Akkads in the north. With the Sumirs 
began the early civilisation of Chaldea, though, in the opinion of 
Sayce, "the pictorial hieroglyphics, which afterwards became the 
cuneiform character, were first invented in Elam," which was peopled 
by kindred Turanian tribes. 1 The Akkads originally settled in the 
mountains south of the Caspian, spread over Elam and the plains, 
forming with the Sumirs one people : " the languages and dialects 
spoken by them were agglutinative .... approaching more nearly 
to the Ural-Altaic family of speech than to any other known group 
of tongues." The principal cities of the Sumirs were Erech, or Uruk, 
Nipur, Larsa (perhaps the Ellasar of Genesis, xiv. i), Zirgulla, Dur, 
Chalma, Kuluna (Cahneh). The Akkadian cities were Babylon and 
Kis ; Sippara and Agane" (or Agadhe) united formed one city the 
Sepharvaim of Scripture ; also Tiggaba, Duraba. and Hit : the 
country was intersected by a network of canals. The existence of 
several separate kingdoms, composed of one or more of these towns, 
frequently at war with each other, exposed this desirable fertile terri- 
tory to the invasion of a less civilised Shemitic race (the Chasdim), 
who amalgamated with the old population. It is very difficult to 
understand the changes which follow. There was an Elamite dynasty 
under Kudur-Nankhundi I., 2280 B.C. ; after him Chedorlaomer 
(Kudur Lagamar), Genesis xiv. i ; this was followed by an Arabian, 
Chaldean, or Kassite dynasty, founded by Khammurgas, 2017 B.C. 
Contemporary with these dynasties there were petty states, sometimes 
independent, one of which had a Shemite dynasty, under Sargon I., 
who ruled over Agane' and Babylon ; this king claims to have had 
a predecessor of the same name so early as 3780 B.C. Sargon I. 
established the library at Agane, and caused the scientific work on 
astronomy and astrology to be compiled in seventy-two books, with 
another on terrestrial omens. He is celebrated as a great conqueror, 
over-running Syria, Palestine, and even Cyprus ; all this is difficult 
to reconcile with the existence at the same time of the Kassite 
dynasty. Under this family, the petty rulers of Assur (one of whom, 
Ismi-Dagon, flourished about 1820 B.C.) increased in power, then 
became independent, and in 1270 B.C. conquered Babylonia. Sub- 

' Sayce, " Herodotvs," pp. 359, 360. 



The Earliest Nations up to icoo B.C. 21 

sequently Babylonia recovered its position ; and one of its kings, 
Nebuchadnezzar, 1150-1120, is recorded as an active and able 
ruler ; but the empire of the west of Asia was, from the thirteenth 
century B.C., in the hands of the monarchs of Assyria. 

One remarkable fact connected with these Babylonian Sumirs and 
Akkadians, is their comparatively advanced position in the arts of 
civilised life, and their possession of an extensive and varied literature. 
With architecture, engineering, metallurgy, castings, pottery, textile 
manufactures of a superior character, they were familiar ; so also with 
the use of the mechanical powers as the lever and the pulley ; and 
with optics, sufficient to enable them to manufacture the lens. In 
sculpture and painting they had made some progress. They had 
made astronomical observations from a very remote period. Their 
literature, preserved on brick tablets mainly, embraced works on 
history, poetry (epic poems, fables, hymns), science, law, grammar 
and vocabularies of Akkadian words with Shemitish explanations. 
It is singular that from this people, probably while resident near 
Lake Aral, a small colony (of one hundred and twenty families) 
carried this civilisation to China, a fact fully proved by a learned 
French savant, M. Terrieu de la Couperie. 1 But with all this supe- 
riority in the arts and sciences, they are believed to have been the first 
organisers of a system of idolatry, and were slaves to the most degrad- 
ing of all the superstitions of the heathen world. In addition to 
polytheism, image-worship, and the adoration of the heavenly bodies, 
their minds were oppressed by the fear of sorcery, which is every- 
where the accompaniment of that species of spirit-worship known as 
Shamanism, which to this day is the ruling faith of the tribes of 
southern Siberia. Besides three hundred heavenly spirits and six 
hundred earthly ones, every inanimate object had, or was supposed to 
have, a spirit, all of which were objects of fear, more or less to 
be guarded against by exorcisms or charms, or otherwise propitiated; 
the bondage of such a system must have been all but unbearable to 
sensitive and tender consciences, and must have been a source of 
gain to astrologers and exorcists. 

ASSYRIA is referred to in Genesis x. n, 12, in connexion with 
Assur (the Assyrian), who, departing from Babylonia, founded 
Nineveh, Rehoboth, Calah, and Resen. Its rulers seem to have 
been subject to Babylon, until the decline of the Kassite dynasty, 
when Babylon became independent, perhaps in the sixteenth or 
seventeenth century B.C. The history of Ctesias, compiled from the 

1 Q uarterly Review, No. 307, July, 1882. 



22 First Period. 

Persian chronicles, represents Ninus as the founder of the Assyrian 
empire, followed oy Semiranuis, a great conqueror so early as from 
2,00 to 2000 B.C. Ninyas, her successor, was followed by a series 
Of luxurious rulers, until the fall of the empire under Sardanapalus 
in the ninth century B.C. This history is the exaggeration of national 
vanity Herodotus, with more regard to probability, dates the com- 
mencement of the empire in the thirteenth century B.C. (after the 
subjugation of Babylon), under Ninus, the son of Belus. The 
early kingdom had a very limited territory, extending from the 
Lower Zab to a small distance north of Nineveh. Shalmanezer I. 
made Nineveh a royal residence, and rebuilt Calah 1300 B.C., the 
kingdom then extending to the northern mountains, and began to 
assume an imperial character. It is very difficult to fix the period 
of the Egyptian invasion of northern Syria and of Mesopotamia, and 
of their contests with the Khita west of the Euphrates. Egyptian 
vanity has probably greatly exaggerated the successes of their 
monarchs of the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties, as recorded 
on their monuments. The Khita and the northern Syrians, from 
their position, suffered the most from these raids ; though Assyria and 
Babylonia were more or less affected by them. Tiglath-Adar, the 
Assyrian king, r conquered Babylon 1271 B.C.; his empire extended 
over the valleys of the[Euphrates and Tigris, and from the Armenian 
mountains to the^Persian Gulf. Under his successor, Bel-kudur- 
uzur, 1240, Babylon rebelled, and he was killed in the attempt to 
reconquer it, 1220 B.C. After him several kings, until Assur-risilim, 
1150. This prince recovered lost territory, and subdued a number 
of mountainous tribes, extending the empire to Lake Van (then 
called the Upper Sea). Tiglath-Pileser succeeded, 1120. His reign 
was one of successful warfare with the Khita in Syria, with the 
northern and eastern tribes ; advanced as far as Lebanon and the 
Mediterranean Sea, for the first time reached by the Assyrians. On 
this sea the monarch sailed in a ship of Arvad (Phoenicia), and 
killed a dolphin. He was passionately addicted to hunting the wild 
bulls on Lebanon, and is said to have slaughtered a hundred and 
twenty lions : at Assur he kept a park of animals for the chase. 
The king of Egypt, knowing his taste, sent him a crocodile. Many 
were his restorations of the old buildings and the erection of new 
ones. He left Assyria the foremost monarchy in the world 1 100 B.C. 
After him, his son, Assur-bel-Kala ; then Samsi-vul 1080. After 
him the Assyrian power declined, its dependencies revolted, and the 
Khita and the Syrians recovered their lost ground. This was its 
condition at the beginning of 1000 B.C. These wars were annual 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 23 

raids, alluded to (2 Sam. xi. i) as " the time when kings go forth to 
battle" They were carried on by the Assyrian kings especially, 
from the necessity of their position,, which compelled them to 
support a large military class and their leaders by the plunder 
acquired in the campaigns, and to replenish the treasury by the 
tributes exacted. The most ruthless cruelty was exercised. The 
conquered kings and chiefs were beheaded, impaled, or crucified, or 
burnt alive, or flayed alive ; they were sometimes tortured and 
mutilated, the tongues and the eyes torn out, and similar tortures 
inflicted on hundreds of captives. This enjoyment of cruelty 
appeared in the paintings on the walls of the palaces, which were 
exhibitions of executions and tortures calculated to familiarise the 
spectators with the sight of misery and pain. Conquered populations 
were transferred to distant lands, the men of a nation being located 
with the women of another country, without any regard to domestic 
relationship. The plunder acquired consisted of the precious metals, 
brass, cattle, horses, war-chariots, and instruments of iron. Large 
numbers of slaves were captured, and these, with captives reduced 
to slavery, were employed in public works, or canals, roads, &c.,. 
and in the buildings in Assur and Nineveh. Yet these barbarians 
were not insensible to the value of Babylonian culture, or of 
commerce, Shalmanezer I: having established a library at Calah, 
consisting of brick tablets of Akkadian literature accompanied by 
Shemitish translations. 

It will be noticed that in the political system of Western Asia 
ASSYRIA and BABYLON formed one great power, generally opposed 
and checked by the more concentrated power of EGYPT, and that 
between these great and dominant empires there were subordinate 
but independent states, as PHCENICIA, SYRIA, the KHITA, the 
ISRAELITES, and sundry warlike tribes, whose geographical position, 
as well as their varied resources, rendered them important allies to 
the greater belligerents. 

5. EGYPT was occupied at a very early period by an agricultural 
population ; afterwards, probably, by a warlike caste, which, with its 
earlier kingdoms, commenced probably not earlier than 2600 or 
2700 B.C. "Egyptian history can be carried back with tolerable 
exactness, but not with much detail .... to the commencement 
of the eighteenth dynasty, 1703 or 1520 B.C., from which time the 
whole country formed, with rare and brief exceptions, a single king- 
dom. It is certain that there was a foreign conquest before this 
time, and that a people [the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings], quite 
distinct from the Egyptians, had possession of the country for a 



24 First Period. 

considerable period. But the duration of their dominion, which is 
variously estimated at 260, or 511, or 900 years, is wholly uncertain, 
and will, probably, never be determined. That there was an ancient 
native kingdom before the [Hyksos] conquest may also be laid down 
as an ascertained fact ; and numerous monuments may be pointed out, 
such as the pyramids, very many rock tombs, the grand hydraulic 
works at the Fayoum, and a certain number of temples which belong 
to this period, and are capable of conveying to us a good idea of 
its civilisation. Its duration cannot be estimated at much less than 
seven centuries, and may, perhaps, have been longer, but no exact 
account can be given." 1 

The first king of Egypt was Menes, who united the petty states and 
founded the monarchy ; the beginning of his reign is fixed at widely 
different dates, from 5702 B.C. to 2601 B.C. The principal pyramid 
Guilders were the kings of the first, fourth, and sixth dynasties. 
With this latter dynasty the old empire closed, 3500 B.C., or 2383, 
-or 2140 B.C. ; then there is a blank in the history until the twelfth 
dynasty, 3064, or 2218, or 2020 B.C., when the Middle Empire 
begins ; great changes had taken place in the physical type of the 
ruling class and in the religion of the people. Thebes was the 
capital, not Memphis. The authority for the dates 5702 B.C. &c. 
are the result of a modification of the lists and dates of the Egyptian 
history by Manetho, written about 260 B.C. ; the monument gives 
the names and occasionally the regnal years of the kings, but no 
chronology, and no consistent list of the consecutive order of the 
kings ; hence the monuments cannot be appealed to as authorities 
confirming the chronological system of Mariette, followed by 
Lenormant. To suppose that one nation existed in the possession 
of a high degree of civilisation and the possession of great power, 
some two or three thousand years before the kingdom of Babylonia 
and Chaldea, is highly improbable. 2 The barbarous Shepherd 
Kings (the Hyksos), a Shemitish people from Asia, conquered 
Egypt 2214 or 2020 B.C., with the fifteenth dynasty: they 
then adopted the Egyptian civilisation, but were expelled by the 
founders of the eighteenth dynasty, 1703 or 1520 B.C. From the 
fourteenth to the thirteenth century B.C., the Egyptian monarchs are 
represented as warring with the Babylonians, the Ruten (Syrians), the 
Khita (Hittites) and the Assyrians, in order to secure the suzerainty 

1 See Geo. Wilkinson, " Herodotus," vol. iii. p. 357 

2 See Rawlinson, Herodotus," vol. ii. G. Rawlinson, Origin of Nations," 
pp. 149-161. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 25 

over Syria, which, from the ranges of Lebanon to the Euphrates, was 
the great battle-field of the rulers of Western Asia and Egypt. In 
these wars the Egyptian land forces marched in the lowland path, 
which, avoiding the hills of Palestine, skirts the Mediterranean Sea : 
the military engines and the heavy material of war appear to have 
been conveyed, with portions of the troops, by the navies of the 
Phoenicians. Under the kings of the nineteenth dynasty, 1460-1288, 
or 1412-1300, or 1324-1232, the family of the Ramesids advanced the 
military power of Egypt; the first Rameseswas followed byRameses II. 
the Sesostris of the Greek historians, a great conqueror, whose conflict 
with the Khita has been celebrated by the poet Pentaur, 1360 B.C.; 
but the first king whose views embraced the extension of the power 
of Egypt over Syria was Thothmes I., who began to reign thirty-eight 
years after the expulsion of the Hyksos, and whose ostensible object 
was to avenge the irruptions of the Hyksos. These invasions of 
Asia took place long before the consolidation of the empire of 
Assyria, 1271 B.C. Under the king Meneph-thah, a singular attack 
was made upon Egypt by the Libyans, assisted by various tribes, 
Etruscans, Sicilians, Achseans, Trojans (according to the interpreta- 
tion of the monuments). This was repulsed with great slaughter 
(1350 B.C. perhaps). Lenormant regards this as the result of a 
Libyan-Pelasgic league to resist Phoenician and Egyptian aggression 
on the part of the Greeks and the inhabitants of Sicily and Italy. 
If so, historians have under-rated the early civilisation of the tribes 
of Italy and Greece. The nineteenth dynasty was closed by inferior 
rulers. With the twentieth dynasty the decline of Egypt com- 
menced; the conquests were lost; Egypt was ravaged by the Libyans; 
and the Hittites and the High Priests of Thebes gradually encroached 
upon the kingly power, so that, in about noo B.C., Her-hor, the 
High Priest, founded the twenty-first dynasty. Their rule appears 
to have been peaceful, and the dynasty lasted until 975 B.C. 

The attacks of the Libyans, assisted by these primitive Greeks and 
other northern allies, is a singular fact, which proves that the Greeks 
of that early period were not only warriors but capable of forming 
large temporary confederacies, as, for instance, that which is said 
to have besieged Troy. "Egypt probably gave to the Greeks their 
first glimpses of a settled and luxurious civilisation .... there 
they would find towns wealthier than the fabled towns of the 
Phoenicians ; the fields full of good things, the canals rich in fish, the 
lakes swarming with wild fowl, the meadows green with herbs." 1 

1 A. Lang, Contemporary Review, 1879, pp. 138-200; also Gladstone's 
" Homeric Synchronisms," pp. 138-200. 



2 6 First Period. 

Egypt was, indeed, the great power of the then western world. 
Its architectural wonders, the pyramids, sphynxes, tombs, temples; 
its canal from Bubaste through the Bitter Lakes to the Red Sea 
(made by King Seti and Rameses II., nineteenth dynasty), and the 
other numerous canals for the distribution of the Nile waters in irriga- 
tion, its orderly administration, the power of the king and of the 
priesthood, and the great wealth of the higher classes, so contrasted 
with the condition of Greece as to bear the impression of its 
superior wisdom. The Greeks, in their ignorance, looked upon 
Egypt in the same uncritical spirit as European writers manifested in 
the early accounts of China, until a nearer acquaintance dispelled 
the illusion. Egypt possessed all the arts of civilised life, and its 
higher classes enjoyed a high degree of luxurious comfort. The 
sciences of astronomy, geometry, and medicine, and agriculture were 
cultivated ; her literature, historical, biographical, moral, and poetical 
was accessible to the higher classes in the papyri MSS. But the 
bulk of the population, arranged in castes (if not by law, by custom) 
were in a state bordering on slavery, liable to be drafted from home 
by thousands when needed for public works. Circumcision was to 
them an ancient rite, which had no religious associations : the fellah 
of the nineteenth century is probably a fair representative of the 
fellah under the Pharaohs. The religion of the ancient Egyptians 
is a difficult question, hard to understand. 

None of our Egyptologists seem to be satisfied with their own views 
of the character of the religion of the Egyptians, so great is the diffi- 
culty to reconcile the wide difference between the polytheism and 
animal worship of the multitude, and the more spiritual conceptions of 
the educated classes. The people were pre-eminently religious : the 
cities were crowded with massive temples filled with worshippers, 
who were attracted by the grand and artistic ceremonials within the 
sacred buildings, and by the processions in the streets, or in barges on 
the canals, or on the Nile; the festivals were numerous, a week rarely 
passed without the performance of some special ceremony. A gross 
polytheism, which embraced the heavenly bodies and the principal 
divine attributes, and then descending to animal worship and the 
lowest fetichism of a negro tribe, was the popular religion. Every 
province and even every town had its particular deities. Under the 
old empire Ptah was the superior deity, but under the Lower Empire 
Amun was regarded as chief. There was an esoteric religion for the 
educated classes, "a system combining strict monotheism with a. 
metaphysical speculative philosophy on the two great subjects of the 
nature of God and the destiny of man, which sought to exhaust 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 27 

these deep and unfathomable mysteries." x The primary doctrine was 
the real essential unity of the divine nature, the popular gods being 
regarded as mere personified attributes of Deity, or part of the nature 
which had been created and inspired by him. No educated 
Egyptian conceived the popular gods as really separate and distinct 
beings. The immortality of the soul, its accountability, and judg- 
ment after death in the Hall of Truth, where Osiris presided, was 
the enunciation of a great truth mixed up with fabulous circum- 
stance. If by the decision of the judge the good deeds of the soul 
preponderated, then it was purified in a purgatorial fire and admitted 
to the presence of Osiris for a period of 3,000 years, after which it 
re-entered its own body and lived once more upon earth, until, 
having completed a reiterated cycle of years, it attained the perfect 
union with God. In the case of the guilty soul which the judge 
could not justify, it was sentenced to a series of transmigrations with 
the bodies of unclean animals. If, after many trials, the result was 
unfavourable, the final sentence was complete annihilation. The 
expectation of again needing the body in the renewed life led the 
Egyptians to take extraordinary care in the embalmment of the dead. 
6. THE KHITA (the Hittites of the Bible) were, perhaps, Canaanites, 
perhaps Indo-Europeans, as they were spread from Armenia to the 
north of Syria, and from the Euxine to the west of the Euphrates,. 
and had small settlements in Palestine. Their chief seat was in the 
lands bordering on the west of the Euphrates and northern Syria , 
where the RUTEN, the Syrians, are also noticed as a distinct people. 
Carchemish on the Euphrates, and Kadesh, on the Orontes, were 
the head-quarters of the Khita. In the Book of Joshua (chap. i. 4) 
their frontier, about 1500 B.C., is thus defined : "From this Lebanon, 
even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the 
Hittites, and unto the great sea" As a power they were able to cope 
on equal terms with Egypt on the one hand and Assyria on the 
other. In or about 1360 B.C. occurred the great battle of Kadesh, 
between Rameses II. and the Khita, whose allies came from Asia 
Minor and Kurdistan. The battle is described in a poem by a 
Theban poet, Pentaur, and may be read in Brugsch's " History of 
Egypt," vol. i. p. 46. In this battle Rameses barely saved himself 
from defeat. A few years after, " the increasing movements of the 
nations, and the growing troubles in Canaan, and the pushing 
forward of whole races in West Asia, 'owing to the immigration of 
warlike tribes of foreign origin, seem to have attracted the serious 

1 "Ancient Egypt," by Rawlinson, vol. i. pp. 313-315. 



28 First Period. 

attention of the kings of the Khita as well as of the Egyptian 
Pharaoh. The then Lord of Khita (Khita Sir) was the first to make 
to his Egyptian friend the proposal, written on a tablet of silver, for 
an offensive and defensive alliance." 1 The Khita had not declined in 
influence at the conclusion of this period (1000 B.C.). Their trade by 
caravans from the ports of the Persian Gulf embraced India, Arabia, 
Ethiopia (south of Egypt). Aden, near the entrance of the Red 
Sea, is said to have been one of their depots. They passed through 
the Cilician gates by the road to Sardis and the ^Egean, and con- 
nected by their visits the Grecian States of the ^Egean with Assyria 
and the East, bringing to the knowledge of the Ionian Greeks the 
arts and manufactures of Babylon, &c. It is a matter of dispute 
among the learned whether these people were of Canaanitish, or 
Shemitish, or Indo-European origin, and whether their language was 
Shemitic or agglutinative, or Indo-European. Carchemish was a 
noted entrepot of commerce. The formation of independent king- 
doms in Syria in the eleventh century probably curtailed the power 
of the Khita over northern Syria. It is remarkable that the two 
references to this people in the ist Book of Kings x. 29, and 2nd 
Book of Kings vii. 16, were regarded by Professor F. Newman as 
evidences of the unhistorical character of the books in which they 
occur. To the labours and researches of the late G. Smith, and to 
the learned investigations of A. H. Sayce, we are indebted for the 
resuscitation of the history of the Khita. 

ASIA MINOR, the grand peninsula which abuts upon south-eastern 
Europe, was well known to the Khita, who, as traders, passed 
through its central provinces as far as the ^Egean. The original 
population of this country was probably Turanian, followed by 
Phoenician, Shemitish, and, lastly, by Aryan races, all of them so mixed 
up that the particular character of the population of each people is 
to this day a matter of doubt. The Dardanian kingdom (Troy) 
followed by the kingdom of Phrygia (remembered by its king Gordius 
and the famous knot, which Alexander the Great cut when unable 
to untie it), then the Lydian, who claim for their first dynasty, the 
Atydae, an existence before the thirteenth century B.C. The 
Phrygians were undoubtedly Aryans, and probably nearly allied to 
the Hellenic races, who may have received the beginning of their 
culture from them. The explorations of the learned are now being 
turned in this direction, and have already thrown some glimmering 
light upon the history of their early civilisation, and its origin in the 

1 The treaty may be found in Brugsch, vol. ii. pp. 68-74. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 29 

commercial enterprises of the Khita and the Phoenicians. The 
Bithynians, Paphlagonians, and the Phrygians were supposed to be 
connected with the Thracians on the European side of the Helles- 
pont. Greek colonies, after the Dorian conquest of the Peloponnesus, 
1104 B.C., were established by the dispossessed leader, who, in the 
^Eolian, Ionian, and Doric settlements occupied the whole of the 
west coast of Asia Minor, at that time inhabited probably by a 
kindred race. By the rising power of the kings of Lydia the 
further extension of the territory of these colonists was prevented. 
The first coining of money is by Herodotus ascribed to the Lydians, 
the date not known. Pheidon, Tyrant of Argos, 895-865 or 770-730 
B.C., is said to have first made weights and measures, after the Asiatic 
mode (Babylon), and Leake contends that the Greeks first originated 
a coinage. It is very singular that up to the time of Darius 
Hystaspes we do not read of any coinage in Asia or Egypt. Not a 
single coin has been found in the excavations in Egypt, Babylon, or 
Assyria, but many references to payment in gold and silver by 
weight. But it seems unlikely that there should have been a coinage 
in Lydia, and that neither the Khita nor the Assyrians and Baby- 
lonians had any knowledge of this great convenience. It is possible 
that while large payments were made in the precious metals by 
weight, some tokens of small value were current and used in minor 
payments, and that these have escaped the notice of historians. 

7. The PHCENICIANS have been generally considered as a 
Canaanitish people, one with the old founders of Sidon and Tyre. 
Recently some of the learned incline to regard them as Shemites 
emigrating from, the Persian Gulf, and taking possession of the 
maritime settlements of the Canaanites and Syrians. Others 
suppose that the Phoenicians occupied these cities before the 
Canaanites were in possession of Palestine. 1 These are mere 
conjectures ; probably they were a mixed race of Hamite and 
Shemite blood, drawn together by their commercial habits. As a 
people they are remarkable for three things, (i) They were the 
earliest navigators ; (2) the inventors of alphabetical characters ; 
and, at the same time (3), like the Canaanites, addicted to the most 
degrading, cruel, and licentious rites of all the ancient peoples in 
their religious observances. Their trade by the Mediterranean Sea 
extended to Greece, Italy, Spain, Gaul, and North Africa, and from 
their ports on the Red Sea they visited Arabia Felix and India. By 
land their caravan trade extended from Egypt through Central 

1 See Rawlinson's "Herodotus," vol. i. ; also "Origin of Nations," pp. 

199, 2CO-232. 



3 o First Period. 

Africa- by a route through Babylon they passed through Elam to 
the north-east of Asia ; by a route northwards they traded with 
Armenia and the Caucasian tribes beyond in slaves and horses ; 
from Gades, their Spanish outport, and from their colony of 
Carthage, founded 1233 B.C., in north Africa they explored the north 
and we'st coasts of Africa. For several centuries they were the sole 
navigators in the Mediterranean Sea; their cities on the Syrian 
coast were seats of the manufactories of cotton, linen, and of the 
scarlet dye, as well as of glass and golden ornaments. In the 
23rd chapter of Isaiah and the 27th chapter of Ezekiel there 
are sketches of their trade. As the allies of the kings of 
Egypt, they conveyed troops and warlike machinery to northern 
Syria, and to their naval power the Egyptian settlements in Greece 
were indebted, not only for their foundation, but for their stability. 
The Phoenician cities were governed either by kings or suffetes (in 
Hebrew sophetim i.e., judges), assisted by an oligarchic council. 
In their religion, as in that of the Canaanites, we see the dark side 
of the idolatry of antiquity ; their practical abominations, opposed 
to the purity and decency of private life ; the holocausts of human 
beings, offered as sacrifices to appease the wrath of the gods, reminds 
us of the censure in Deut. xxxii. 1 7, " They sacrificed unto devils, 
not to God" Dean Stanley remarks : " The bright side of poly- 
theism is so familiar to us in the mythology of Greece, that it is 

well to be recalled for a time to its dark side in Palestine 

The Gentile accounts are insensible to the cruel, debasing, and 
nameless sins, which turned the heart of the Israelites sick in the 
worship of Baal, Astarte, and Moloch." * The Phoenicians wor- 
shipped the gods who were regarded as hostile to life with severe 
abstinence, self-mutilation, and human sacrifices. Captives by- 
thousands were offered to Moloch. The best-beloved and high-bred 
children of the nation must be offered as propitiations to avert public 
calamities, of which there is an instance recorded in 2 Kings iii. 27. 
These rites were carried out fully by the Carthaginians. When 
Agathocles of Syracuse besieged Carthage, 310-307 B.C., three 
hundred children taken from the noblest families were sacrificed. 
There was an image of the god Chronos, made of iron, heated by a 
fire underneath. The hands of the image were fully stretched out 
in a downward position, so that the victims placed upon them rolled 
into a cavity filled with fire. The cries of the victims were drowned 
by the noise of the drums and the fifes, the mothers compelled to 

1 "Jewish Church," vol. i. pp. 209, 210. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 31 

stand by without lamentation or sighing. Silius Italicus (in his 
poem " Punica," A.D. 25-60) gives an invocation to the "paternal 
gods" of Carthage, "whose temples are cleansed by murder, and 
who rejoice in being worshipped by the agony of mothers." The 
Canaanitish gods who were regarded as favourable to life were wor- 
shipped with the most shameless prostitution and the most unbridled 
debauchery. 1 The religion of the Canaanites and the Phoenicians, 
based on a false and diabolical notion of the character of God, was 
the upas-tree, which poisoned the intellect, the heart, the morals, 
and the social life of these races. Their extinction, partly by the 
Israelites, and finally by the Romans, as a people accursed by 
humanity, was a blessing to mankind. One good thing they gave 
to Europe, in the alphabet which, it is said, Cadmus brought to 
Greece in the sixteenth century B.C. 

8. The history of the ISRAELITES, until within the present century, 
had been generally regarded as a mere episode in the narrative of 
the world's history, one exclusively belonging to the theology of the 
old dispensation, and deriving all its interest from its position as 
introductory to the knowledge of Christianity, the religion accepted 
by the civilised world. In our day Dr. Hales and Dr. Russell have 
called attention to the intimate connexion of this history with that of 
the ancient world, while Ewald, in Germany, and Deans Milraan 
and Stanley, in works which bear the impress of no ordinary learning 
and genius, have given us, for the first time, detailed narratives which 
cannot fail to attract and interest the general reader, and which must 
not be neglected by the historical student, though he may differ largely 
from some Of the opinions and theories of these admirable writers. 
The Biblical history of this people is the best introduction to the general 
history of the world. Students well trained in the narrative from 
Genesis to Nehemiah are prepared to read with advantage the 
records of Egypt and of the Oriental world, as introductory to the 
classical narratives of Greece and Rome. The patient perusal of 
the historical books of the Bible, in connexion with the works of 
Milman and Stanley, yields, in fact, an amount of solid information 
which is an antidote to the one-sided superficial historical scepticism 
of some of our popular writers. In the education of the human 
race, God had committed to the descendants of Abraham "the 
oracles of God" Romans iii. 2; thus it is that, "while all other 
nations over the earth have developed a religious tendency which 
acknowledged a higher than human power in the universe, Israel is 

1 Max-Duncker, vol. i. pp. 351, 352. 



32 First Period. 

the only one which has risen to the grandeur of conceiving of this 
Va&9&the one only living God. . . . If we are asked how it was that 
ABRAHAM possessed not only the primitive conception of the Divinity 
as He had revealed Himself to mankind, but passed through the denial 
of all other Gods to the knowledge of the one God, we are content to 
answer, that it was by a special revelation." * But, as Gladstone remarks, 
" It was not monotheism alone which gave a special character to the re- 
ligion of that Shemitish people (the Jews) It was the sense of sin; 

it was the association of a moral law with Deity, as its living fountain 
head ; it was, above all, the relation of the individual soul to God, 
developed in the Psalms, with an intimacy and richness which have 
made them the delight, the marvel, and the training school of the 
Christian world." 2 The chronology of the Israelite history is very 
uncertain, the true numbers of the original Hebrew text having been 
lost. The date of the exode from Egypt, given by Hales at 1648 B.C., 
is by Usher, as in the margin of our Bibles, 1491 B.C. ; by Bunsen, 
jun., 1563 B.C. ; by Conder, 1541 B.C. The learned at present, with 
Baron Bunsen, seem to favour the date 1320 B.C., a date very diffi- 
cult to reconcile with the Biblical narrative. The date by Conder 
seems a probable one, which meets most difficulties. The patriarch 
ABRAM, of the line of Shem, resident in Ur of the Chaldees, where 
idolatry had been very recently systematised and imposed with 
authority upon the population, was divinely called to proceed to 
Harran, and thence to the land of Canaan, about 2186 B.C. (according 
to Hales' system of chronology). The promise given to him was 
that he should be the progenitor of a great nation, and that in him 
should " all the families of tht earth be blessed" (Genesis xii. 13). 
Abram, afterwards called Abraham, and the succeeding patriarchs of 
the tribe which they led, were, on a large and more dignified scale, 
like the venerable sheiks of the more respectable and uncorrupted 
of the Bedouin tribes of our day ; but they were independent rulers, 
important from the number of their armed followers, and from their 
wealth in cattle, &c. JACOB, the grandson of Abraham, removed 
into Egypt, about 1971 B.C., with his tribe, which could not be less 
than three thousand persons, and settled, by permission of the 
Egyptian king, in the land of Goshen, 'the eastern and exposed frontier 
of the Delta. When the kings of the eighteenth dynasty, jealous of 
the increase of the Israelites, and fearing their possible sympathy 
with the nomad races, recently expelled from Egypt, were led to 

1 Max-Muller, "Chips from a German Workshop," vol. i. p. 172. 
" Olympic System," Nineteenth Century, October 1879. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 33 

attempt to reduce them to slavery, and greatly oppressed them, God 
raised up MOSES as their deliverer. He led them out of Egypt, 1541 
B.C., a body of 600,000 adults, to which number (including women and 
children, about 2,000,000) the Israelites descended from Jacob, and 
those adopted into the tribes had increased in the space of 430 years. 
We have an all but perfect character in MOSES the man of God (Deut. 
xxxiii. i), " a man who considered merely in an historical light . . . 
has exercised a more external and permanent influence over the 
destinies of his own nation, and mankind at large, than any other 
individual recorded in the annals of the world .... to his own 
nation Moses was chieftain, historian, poet, lawgiver. He was more 
than all this he was the author of their civil existence .... Moses 
had first to form his people and bestow on them a country of their 
own before he could create his commonwealth .... the virtue of 
pure and disinterested patriotism never shone forth more unclouded 
, . . . Let Moses, as contrasted with human legislators, be judged 
according to his age, he will appear, not merely the first who founded 
a commonwealth on just principles, but a lawgiver who advanced 
political society to as high a degree of perfection as the state of 
civilisation which his people had attained, or were capable of 
attaining, could possibly admit. But, if such be the benign, the 
prematurely wise and original character of the Mosaic institutes, 
the faith of the Jew and of the Christian in the divine com- 
mission of the great legislator is the more strongly established 
and confirmed." 1 After forty years' residence in the wilderness 
of Arabia, south of Palestine, Moses died, and the Israelites, 
under Joshua, commenced the conquest of Canaan, the land 
promised by God to their great father Abraham 1501 B.C. Among 
the class of "adopted" Israelites, not of the race of Abraham, 
the names of Caleb and Othniel may be noticed. On the death of 
Joshua the Israelites were governed by the ordinary rulers of the 
twelve tribes, and occasionally by " Judges " raised up as patriotic 
leaders to resist the oppression of foreign invaders from the neigh- 
bouring nomad tribes. The Egyptian kings, satisfied with the non- 
interference of the Israelites with their quiet passage along the sea- 
shore, their land route to northern Syria and the Euphrates, were 
not disposed to enter the hill country of Palestine in order to 
interfere in the wars between the Canaanites and the people of 
Israel. The last of the Judges was Samuel, by whom, to gratify the 
wishes of the nation, Saul was appointed king 1071 B.C. DAVID 

1 Milman's " History of the Jews," vol i. 8vo. pp. 213-215. 
D 



34 First Period. 

began to reign 1051 B.C., and during his forty years' reign founded 
a large kingdom extending from Egypt and the Red Sea to the 
Euphrates, of which Jerusalem was the capital. The circumstances 
of the times were favourable. The great powers, Egypt and Assyria, 
were at that time distracted by internal troubles, and unable to 
oppose. But the history of David, recorded in the Old Testament, 
and his Psalms, are the lasting memorials of his life. SOLOMON, the 
son of David, succeeded, ion B.C. His influence in his later years 
was evil ; all his power and wealth used for selfish aggrandisement, 
and his theoretic wisdom became practical folly. The sacred 
historian faithfully depicts the good and the evil in his character. 
The Temple, which he built, and for which his father David had 
made provision, is one of the abiding associations of his name, 
together with the Proverbs, the book of Ecclesiastes, and the Song 
of Songs, which are attributed to him. 

The Israelites were mainly an agricultural people, but they had a 
national literature of songs, histories, biographies, &c., to which there 
are references in their sacred books. These books comprise the five 
books of the Pentateuch, the books of Ruth, Joshua, the Judges, and 
the two books of Samuel, with the earlier Psalms, which were probably 
in the hands of the educated classes in the settled period of peace 
enjoyed in the reign of Solomon. The genuiness of the Pentateuch 
and of the other books has been questioned by some of the learned 
in Germany and England. These critics have pointed out words 
and phrases which imply a later date, and so far they have done 
good service towards the Biblical criticism of our day. They have 
convinced the friends of the Bible that, in the many revisions of the 
old text, words and phrases which had become obsolete have been 
modernised, that marginal notes and explanatory additions have 
unawares crept into the text, and that there may be a few interpola- 
tions, referring simply to historical, chronological, or topological facts, 
but which have no bearing on faith or morals. If, on these grounds, 
the antiquity of the sacred books is to be discredited, then, there is 
not a single old writing from Homer, the old Greek poet, down to 
Geoffry Chaucer in England, which is not in the same position. 
To Christians the testimony of the Jewish Church, corroborated 
by the strong affirmation of Our Lord, is sufficient evidence. The 
preservation of this sacred literature was favoured by the existence 
of the priesthood, and of the Levites, distinct by their tribal origin 
from the rest of the people, and separated to religious duties, by 
whom some acquaintance with the history, and the ritual, and the 
laws of the Mosaic code given to the people by Moses at Sinai was 



The Earliest Nations up to icoo B.C. 35 

absolutely necessary. Schools of the Prophets had been instituted 
by Samuel, in which pious young men were trained by zealous 
patriotic teachers in the knowledge of the Law. If at that time 
the book of Job were known (which is not improbable), then some 
of the deepest problems of philosophy were brought in contact with 
the minds of Hebrew thinkers. 

The failure of the Israelitish people to realise the ideal of a 
theistical righteous community is the more to be regretted when we 
consider the character of the institutions given to them. "By the 
Law, to which they gave their free and unconditional consent, the 
great Jehovah became their king .... the feudal lord of all their 
territory .... Hence the Mosaic constitution .... was, in its 
origin and principles, entirely different from every human policy. It 
was a federal compact .... between the Founder of the state, the 
proprietor of the land .... and the Hebrew nation, selected from 
all the rest of the world for some great ulterior project : the terms by 
which they held .... were their faithful discharge of their trust, 
the preservation of the great religious doctrine, the worship of the 
one great Creator .... the permanence of the national blessings 
depended upon the integrity of the national faith. Apostasy .... 
brought the curse of barrenness, defeat, famine, or pestilence on the 
whole land : it was repressed with the most unrelenting severity .... 
perpetual sacrifices enlivened their faith : frequent commemorative 
festivals .... reminded them of all the surprising and marvellous 
events of their national history .... Above all, the great universal 
rite of sacrifice was regulated with the utmost precision .... The 
ordinary festivals were of a gayer and more cheerful character. 
Every seventh day was the Sabbath. Labour ceased through the 
land .... The new moon, or the first day of the lunar month, 
was a festival ; and on three occasions the Passover festival, the 
feast of Pentecost, and the feast of Tabernacles all the males of all 
the tribes were to assemble wherever the Tabernacle of God was 
fixed. This regulation was a master-stroke of policy, to preserve 
the bond of union indissoluble among the twelve federate republics 
which formed the early state .... At each of these festivals the 
frontiers were unguarded ; special divine protection at such times 
was assured to them (Exodus xxxiv. 24.) The Sabbatic year was 
another remarkable instance of departure from every rule of political 
wisdom in reliance on Divine providence. The whole land was to lie 
fallow .... At the end of seven periods of seven years .... the 
Jubilee was appointed .... all the estates were to revert to their 
original owners .... and the whole land returned to the same state 

D 2 



3 6 First Period. 

in which it stood at the first partition .... the law (an agrarian 
law) prevented the accumulation of large masses of landed property 
in one family .... To one tribe, that of Levi, a tenth of the pro- 
duce of the whole land was assigned, instead of a portion of the land 
due to them as one of the twelve tribes .... But .... did the 
Jewish people ever fulfil the noble scheme of the Jewish legislator ? 
of the observance of the Sabbatic year, still less of the great 
agrarian law of the Jubilee, we have no record .... The failure 
impugns not the wisdom of the legislator .... it condemns only 
the people of Israel, who never rose to the height of that wisdom." l 
The violation of the covenant by the Israelitish people is specially 
observable : (i) in the repeated apostasies of the nation from the 
worship of Jehovah to the idolatrous abominations and cruelty of the 
Canaanitish ritual; (2) in the neglect of that system of restraint 
upon accumulation, which, if carried out, would have realised the 
Utopia of philosophical speculation. For their violation of their 
Covenant Act, their fundamental constitution as a people, they 
suffered in their own land, in their captivities, and in their subse- 
quent dispersion as we now see them. 

So far the history has been confined to the ancient nations ot 
south-western Asia, whose political system included Egypt ; but 
there are already in Europe young and active races preparing for 
the conquest of the known world. 

9. EUROPE was peopled the last of the continents, receiving from 
the East branches of the widespread so-called TURANIAN races, and, 
perhaps, from the African BERBERS, the Iberians, Ligurians, &c., from 
the south. Then followed the KELTIC emigration, the HELLENIC and 
ITALIC, the Teutonic, and, last of all, the Sclavonic. The views of 
.our scholars are given in the Preliminary Notes, IV. Dr. Donaldson 
recognises a Sclavonic element in the old Pelasgic ancestry of the 
^Greek races : whatever may have been the original stock, these Hel- 
lenic Greeks were a remarkable people. " No race ever did so many- 
different things so well as the Greeks. They were the first people 
who thought of finding out the truth and reason in everything." 2 

The history of GREECE is all debatable land, especially in the 
history of the early ages, the " origines" of the race. In England 
we have three great writers Mitford, Thirlwall, and Grote, besides 
an English translation of Curtius, the German professor at Dorpat, 
and of Max Duncker. The history of Mitford is that of a bitter 

1 Milman's " History of the Jews," vol. i. pp. 148-160. 
* C. A. Fyffe, " History of Greece," 241110. 1875. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 37 

Tory, a hater of democratic institutions in fact, a political manifesto 
in 8 vols. 8vo. Freeman remarks that, " with all his blunders 
and all his unfairness, he did good service in showing that Plutarch's 
men were real beings like ourselves .... He was a bad scholar, 
a bad historian, a bad writer of English, but he was the first 
writer of any note who found out that Grecian history was a living 
thing, with a practical bearing." * Gladstone thinks that, "notwith- 
standing his prejudices, Mitford is an author whom no one need, even 
at this day, be ashamed to consult or to quote .... He surely marks 
one of the advancing stages of Greek historiography." 2 Thirlwall's 
" calm judgment and consummate scholarship came to correct, 
sometimes too unmercifully, the mistakes and perversions of Mitford; 
but it was Grote who first looked straight at everything, without 
regard to convenient beliefs, by the light of his own historical and 
political knowledge. 3 Grote ignores pre-historic and ethnological 
speculations, thinking with Sir G. Cornwall Lewis that these ' rest on 
no evidence.' " Certainly " they rest on no contemporary written 
evidence j but surely they rest on an evidence of their own that 
evidence which is of the same kind as that which forms the ground- 
work of philology, and of some branches of natural science of 
geology, for instance, which is simply archaeology before man. 
Moreover, it sometimes happens, as in the case of the legendary 
history of Mykene, that archaeological and legendary evidence coin- 
cide so wonderfully as to leave no doubt that the legend has 
preserved the memory of a real state of things." 4 Curtius "came to 
his Grecian history with the last results of ethnological and philo- 
logical study .... which gave him, so far, a great advantage over 
both his English predecessors. 5 So far, by way of introduction to the 
history of Greece, the most eastern peninsula of Europe, called by 
its people Hellas, a territory much less than Portugal. It has an 
extensive line of coast, broken up into innumerable bays and gulfs, 
well furnished with natural harbours, and was thus divided into small 
isolated districts by rugged mountain-ranges, between which the 
valleys alone were adapted to cultivation. There is not one large 
plain in the whole of Greece. Hence the inhabitants (the most an- 
cient being the Pelasgi, after whom the Hellenes, a warlike kindred 
people), though of one stock and speaking the same language, were 

1 Freeman's "Essays," second series, pp. 111-155. 

8 Homeric " Synchronisms," p. 190. 

3 Freeman, pp. 155, 156. 4 Ibid., second series, pp. 113, 114. 

5 Freeman's " Essays," second series, p. mi. 



J. i^\~iiitlil} Y\f* *-JJ9 J O V -'* AUiVi.j VBW 

5 Freeman's " Essays," second series, p. 151 



. 8 First Period. 

never (except when a conquered people) united under one govern- 
ment Each valley had its ruler, and of these petty political 
organisations there were about one hundred in all Greece, but m 
many different stages of progress as regards the arts and usages of 
civilised life. Some remained in their original tribal organisations, as 
the Illyrians, Epirots, and the more northern tribes much in the 
condition of the Albanians of our day. In most of these states 
there was a king, with chiefs exercising a patriarchal government 
over a free people, who expected to be ruled by their old customs. 
Tribal wars were frequent, and inroads from the more barbarous 
tribes to the north retarded the progress of civilisation. The 
Phoenicians first introduced the use of letters and the culture of the 
East. The legends respecting the power and legislation of Minos, 
the Cretan legislator, probably refer to the effects of Phoenician and 
Egyptian influence on that island, upon which, and upon the other 
islands, and on the mainland, the Phoenicians and the Egyptians had 
made settlements from the Deltan-Phoenician colony, rather than 
from Phoenicia direct. For example Danaus, from Egypt to Argos, 
1500 B.C. ; Cadmus, from the East to Thebes, who brought over the 
Phoenician alphabet, 1550 B.C. ; Cecrops, from Sais, in Egypt, who 
founded Athens, 1555 B.C. ; Pelops, from Lydia, who gave his name 
to the Peninsula (the Morea), and others in the sixteenth and 
fifteenth centuries B.C., whose names are to be found in the old 
legends. Perhaps some of these were rich and powerful settlers 
from Phoenicia or Egypt. There are references also to some ex- 
peditions in which leading Greek chiefs acted in unison; for instance, 
that of the Argonauts to Colchis, "to procure the Golden Fleece;" 
probably a raid upon the coasts of the Euxine, 1225 B.C. ; the War of 
the Seven against Thebes, 1213 B.C., a family feud sung by the poets ; 
the Trojan War, in which the Greeks under Agamemnon, king of 
Myke'ne, besieged and destroyed Troy, in Asia Minor, after a ten 
years' siege, to revenge the elopement of Helen with Paris, 1184 B.C.; 
a war unimportant in itself, and which is mainly interesting to us 
because the theme of the poem of Homer. In the year 1104 B.C. 
the more warlike Dorian tribes from the north of Greece occupied 
the Peloponnesus. This is called the Return of the Heraclida, the 
leading chiefs of the Dorians deriving their claim to that territory 
from their supposed descent from the mythical hero Hercules. We 
read also of a Council of Amphictyons, representing a confederacy of 
Hellenic tribes in and near Thessaly, which had charge of the Oracle 
at Delphi and of the treasures deposited there, and from this 
position had occasionally some influence in political affairs. The 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 39 

reality of these events, with the dates affixed, which the makers of the 
Parian Marbles received as authentic in the third century B.C., rest 
on legends which, though believed by these Greek archaeologists, 
have been questioned in modern times. Recently, however, there 
has arisen a reaction against the excesses of this historical criticism, 
a reaction quickened and confirmed by the excavations made at 
Ilium, Mykene, and Tiryns, by Schliemann, and again by some 
obscure intimations in the Egyptian records, which seem to vindicate 
the substantial truth of some of the old legends. "The older 
Shemitic histories, the Egyptian inscriptions, and the traditions of 
the Greeks themselves agree that the Phoenicians certainly, and 
perhaps the Egyptians, sailed with powerful fleets through the 
^gean, and traded with enormous advantage with the rude inhabit- 
ants of the coasts and islands, by means of their imposing wealth 
and culture. They settled also in Greek waters, partly for commercial 
and mining purposes, as, for example, at Thasos .... but partly, 
also, from the desire of forming new empires. Just as distinguished 
Athenians, like Miltiades or Iphicrates, became great princes among 
* the butter-eating Thracians,' so we may suppose that the legends of 
Minos, of Cadmus, and Danaus indicate sovereignties set up by 
these civilised foreigners, in pre-historic days, among the Greeks 
.... the legend of Minos seems to us the echo of the most 
important of these sovereignties. But the pre-historic ruins at Argos, 
Mykene, and Orchomenos show that Crete was not the only seat of 
culture .... Gradually Greek, or semi-Greek chiefs began to 
dispossess these Semitish forerunners of Greek culture. The native 
chiefs seem then to have succeeded to the power and wealth already 
centred at Argos, Myke'ne, Crete, and Orchomenos, and other such 
favourable positions. The great Cyclopian ruins are found on the 
very sites indicated in Homer as the seats of the greatest monarchs. 
Accordingly, I conceive that Agamemnon, Menelaus, Nestor, and 
others of the richer chiefs, but especially the Atreidse, rather inherited 
a power and wealth, established originally by the enlightened 
despotisms of Shemitic merchant princes, and not gradually acquired 
by the extension of a local patriarchal sway .... The general tone 
of the Iliad and Odyssey implies, then, not a nascent but a decay- 
ing order of things subordinated chiefs rebelling against their 
suzerains, nobles violating the rights of their absent chief." 1 To 
suppose that the early history of Greece is wholly mythic, that is to 
say, a series " of current stories, the spontaneous and earliest growth 

: Mahaffy, "Social Life in Greece," pp. 15-18. 



40 First Period. 

of the Grecian mind," l is to ignore the fact that their varied and local, 
as well as their general character, their agreements and their differ- 
ences clearly and decisively point out to local hereditary tradition as 
their true origin. 

Soon after the Dorian conquest of the Peloponnesus the petty 
kingdoms became first aristocratical and then democratical, according 
as one or an opposite party prevailed. This may have been hastened 
by the decay or extinction of the great historical families. Grote 
considers that " the prime cause is doubtless to be sought in the 
smallness and concentrated residence of each distinct Hellenic 
society. A single chief, perpetual and irresponsible, was no way 

essential for the maintenance of union the primitive 

sentiment entertained towards the heroic king died out, passing 
first into indifference, next after experience of the despots into 
determined antipathy. 2 A republican government requires for its 
success a high type of national character. So far, in Greece, in 
England, and the United States, as well as in old Rome and in 
modern France, the paucity of that high type has been unfavourable 
to the working of purely democratic institutions. Greece was known 
to the Hebrews as Chittim (Numbers xxiv. 24 ; Daniel xi. 30) : the 
name of Javan is also used (Isaiah Ixvi. 19 ; Ezekiel xxvii 13-19). 

10. Italy, in ancient times, was confined to the territory of the 
centre and south. North Italy, the valley of the Po, and the plains 
of Lombardy belonged to Ligurians and the Gauls (Kelts); it 
was only known as Gallia Cisalpina to the early Romans. Some 
suppose the Ligurians to have been partly, at least, of Berber origin, 
from Spain and southern Gaul. The Etruscans, whose origin is a 
problem, came from the north, and drove the Umbrians, an old 
Italian race, southwards. These Umbrians, Oscans, Opicians, Latins, 
Samnites, and Volsci are supposed to be of the Indo-Germanico- 
Sclavonic stock by Dr. Donaldson, 3 in which the SCLAVONIC- 
LITHUANIAN type can be recognised. According to Freeman, 4 
there were two branches of the Italian race, one nearly akin to the 
Greeksthe LATINS ; the other, of the original Italic Aryan race, 
the Sabines, Equians, Volscians, Samnites (i.e., the Oscans) ; in 
the south, the old Pelasgic settlers from Greece. All these tribes 
were related. The Greeks were their brothers; the Lithuanian- 
Sclavonics their cousins. The political capabilities of the Greeks 

1 Crete's " History of Greece," vol. i. I2mo. p. in. 

2 Ibid., vol. iii. pp. 10-16, 

3 " Varronianus," pp. 59-65. 

"Hist. Geog. of Europe," vol. i. pp. 215, 216. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 41 

and Italians differed. The Greek political unit and centre was his 
own city ; he could not be welded into unity with other cities of his 
own race, except by despotic power ; the only national feeling was 
connected with games and the arts. The Olympian games, the 
poems of Homer, the tragedies of Euripides, and others were the 
links of union to the Hellenic races. On the other hand, "the 
Italian surrendered his own personal will for the sake of freedom, 
and learned to obey the state. In such subjection as this individual 
development might be marred, and the germs of fairest promise in 
man might be arrested in the bud. The Italian gained instead a 
feeling of fatherland and of patriotism, which the Greeks never 
knew, with an earnest faith in his own gods and thus alone, among 
all the civilised nations of antiquity, succeeded in working out 
national unity in connexion with a constitution based on self-govern- 
ment a national unity which at last placed in his hands the 
supremacy, not only over the divided Hellenic stock, but over the 
whole known world." 1 

The ETRUSCANS remain to this day a puzzle to philologists and 
archaeologists, an illustration of the incompleteness of our historical 
knowledge. They trace their origin to the north-east, and call them- 
selves " Rasena." Being totally unlike any other Italian people, the 
opinion is that they were a Turanian people similar to the Finns, 
and Basques, but Dr. Donaldson thinks they were a branch of the 
Norse Scandinavians. 2 They had first settled in Rhaetia ; then 
in the plains of the Po, from the Ticino to the Adige and beyond, 
forming there a confederacy of twelve cities at a very remote period ; 
after this, driven onward by the Gauls or Germans, they crossed the 
Apennines, and extended their territories to the Tiber, occupying 
the land now called Etruria or Tuscany. Here they built twelve 
cities, each of which was governed by a Lucumo (king). They had 
also at that time settlements in Campania at Capua, and other cities. 
Physically, they were short and stout ; their religion was gloomy ; 
their architecture, sculpture, pottery, works in metal prove their 
advancement in the arts of civilised life. In maritime affairs, they, 
at an early period, covered with their piratical corsairs the western 
Mediterranean, and formed a treaty with the Carthaginians to 
oppose Greek colonisation. Their language appeared barbarian to 
the Greeks and Romans, and is a mystery to this day : the alphabet 
is of Greek origin. The remains of their massive buildings at 
Fiesole, and elsewhere, resemble those of early Greece and Lydia. 

1 Mommsen, vol. i. I2mo. pp. 30, 31. 2 " Varronianus," p. 69. 



42 First Period. 

ii Western and central Europe were first peopled by Turanian 
races, widely and sparsely scattered, and afterwards mostly absorbed 
by the Keltic races, followed by the Germanic and Sclavonic races. 
SPAIN appears to have received, at a very early period, a Berber 
population from north Africa, the Iberians, who occupied not only 
Spain, but southern Gaul, and in Italy were known as the Ligurians. 
The Basques, in the north of Spain, are supposed to be of Berber 
origin. The Phoenicians, and the Carthaginians after them, estab- 
lished trading stations on the southern and eastern coasts of Spain. 
Carteia, supposed by some to have occupied a position near the 
narrow neck of San Roque (Gibraltar), claims to be one of the oldest 
cities in Europe, probably founded long before 1500 B.C. Tartessus, 
at the mouth of the river Bcetis, was a Phoenician factory, from 
which the name of Tarshish was taken by the Hebrews, and applied 
by them in the same vague meaning as, a few years ago, we used to 
speak of "the Indies." When first visited by the Phoenicians, "the 
gold of its mines was a treasure not yet appreciated by its possessors. 
They bartered it .... to strangers in return for the most ordinary 
articles of civilised living, which barbarians cannot enough admire. 
This story (from Herodotus) makes us feel that we are indeed living 
in the old age of the world. The country, then so fresh and 
untouched, has now been (1838) in the last stage of decrepitude ; 
its mines, then so abundant, have been long since exhausted ; and, 
after having in its turn discovered and almost drained the mines of 
another world, it lies now like a forsaken wreck on the waves of 
time, with nothing but the memory of the past to ennoble it." l 

12. There are three ancient "geographical expressions," the 
people of which were far removed from the revolutions and politics 
of Europe, western Asia, and Egypt namely, ARABIA, INDIA, and 
CHINA. 

ARABIA is said to have been settled by CUSHITE races, the Adites 
and the Amalekites, the latter partially Shemitic. the Yoktanites, 
from Shem, formed a large portion of the population, and with the 
Ishmaelites, descended from Abraham, may be regarded as the 
ancestors of the present Arabs. Yemen, known to the Egyptians as 
Pun, was a Cushite centre of trade, to which the Egyptians, the 
Phoenicians, and, at a later period, the Israelites resorted. The 
Edomites (Idumeans), from their commanding position at Petra, had 
the main control of the caravan trade, arrangements being made 
with the tribes through which the caravans passed. The Moabite 

1 Dr. Arnold's " History of Rome," vol. i. 486. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 43 

and the Ammonite tribes were the near neighbours and, like the 
Edomites, the antagonists of Israel. 

INDIA. The history of this vast peninsula and continent (for such 
it is) connects it with eastern Persia (Iran). The ARYAN races 
settled in Iran sent forth the Aryan conquerors of India. These 
Aryans were for many ages settled in BACTRIA, which was a powerful 
state 2000 to 2500 B.C., the defence of eastern Persia against the 
nomad tribes beyond the Oxus. Balk and Samarcund are ancient 
capitals and centres of trade. It is supposed that the settlement of 
northern and western India by the ARYANS took place between 
2000 and 1500 or 1200 B.C., and that before this migration from 
Persia, the religion of the Aryans in Persia had been modified by a 
great reformer (Zarathustra) ZOROASTER : he was opposed to the 
nature worship, the pantheism, and the polytheism, which had begun 
to corrupt the pure Theism of the earlier Aryans. With him, the 
gods of these Aryans, who had migrated to India, were regarded as 
Daemons, and Indra and Seva as spirits of evil. lie aimed to teach 
pure Theism; but, unable to account for the origin of evil, he 
imagined the existence of two equally powerful gods Ormuzd, the 
good, the creator, the benefactor; and Ahriman, the evil, the source 
of all moral and physical evil, and of death. Zoroaster is placed 
by some earlier and later than 1000 B.C. even so low as 400 to 
500 B.C. : probably there were several successors and revivers of 
Zoroaster who have been confounded with the original teacher. 
Fire (as pure) is the only visible representation of Ormuzd admitted 
into the Zend temples. Their religious book is the " ZEND AVESTA," 
the antiquity of which is not settled. The reforms of Zoroaster led 
to a war among the Aryans, in which the followers of Zoroaster were 
the conquerors ; hence the continued migration of the discomfited 
party to India. In the " RIG VEDA," the sacred book of the Indians, 
there are maledictions heaped upon Zoroaster. As the Aryans of 
Iran pushed westward to Media and western Persia, the Turanian 
inhabitants were by degrees subdued ; but the conflict of races has 
been celebrated as that of Iran and Turan by the Persian poet 
Firdousi. Before the invasion of the Aryans, INDIA had received 
three large immigrations from its neighbours (i) By a Thibetan race, 
from which the Mongolians and Chinese received their first popula- 
lation ; (2) A Kolarian race, now represented by the Santals, &c. ; 
(3) A Dravidian race (the Tamils), Turanians who occupied 
eventually southern India, and were able, by their civilisation, to 
maintain their position against the Aryan races. All these races 
were called by the Aryans Dasyus (enemies), Dasas (slaves). The 



44 First Period. 

Vedic hymns speak of them with scorn ; yet some of them were 
advanced in civilisation, had castles and forts. They were driven 
from the valley of the Ganges 1400 B.C., about which time the 
Brahminical system (unknown to the Vedas) was established among 
the Aryan conquerors. According to that theory (i) the caste of 
the Brahmins is from the mouth of Brahma, there are the priests, 
superior in dignity to all others ; (2) the Kshatriya, the military 
class, from the arms of Brahma ; (3) the Vasyas, husbandmen, from 
the thighs of Brahma ; (4) the Sudras, the lowest of the people, 
from his feet, but all these are twice born. There was a long contest 
between the Brahmins and the military class for the superiority of 
position, in which the craft and prestige of the Brahmin prevailed. 
These castes have been largely subdivided. The religion of 
the Brahmins was pantheistic all things and men are emanations 
from Brahma, and the great end of life is to seek reabsorption into 
Deity. The Suttee, however, is no part of the original religion of 
the Vedas. 1 

" The political organisation of the people of India, whether Aryan 
or Dravidian, seems to have borne a great resemblance to that of the 
Teutonic people. It originated in the clearance of primeval forests 

by the pioneers of humanity Every new clearance gradually 

grew into a village ; these villages became subject to those internal 
changes and revolution which are inseparable from the progress of 
the human race .... In due course, the Village comprised a com- 
munity of independent householders, each of which had his own family, 
his own homestead, and his own separate parcel of arable land for 
cultivation, and a common right to the neighbouring pastures .... 
But, while the individual householder was the supreme head of his 
own family, within the limits of his own homestead, he was bound, 
as a member of the village community, to conform to all its multi- 
farious rules and usages as regards the order of cultivation, and the 
common right of his neighbours to graze their cattle on the pasture 
.... The ancient village community of independent landowners, 
governed by common rights and usages, naturally acquired a political 
organisation of its own .... Its affairs were conducted by a 
council of elders, or by the council in association, with a head man, 
who was either elected to the post by the village community, or 
succeeded to it as an hereditary right .... at a later period of 
development each village had its own officials, such as the account- 
ant, the nobleman, the priest, the physician, the musician. It had 

1 See Max-Duncker : Talboys. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 45 

also its own artisans, as the blacksmith, the carpenter, the worker in 
leather, the tailor, the potter, the barber ; these officers and artisans 
were generally hereditary, and were supported by grants of land rent 
free, or by fees contributed by the landholders in grain, or perhaps in 
money .... Village republics seem to last when nothing else lasts ; 
revolution succeeds to revolution. Hindu, Patan, Mogul, Mahratta, 
Sikh, English, are all masters in turn, but the village community 
remains the same." 1 

CHINA was probably first possessed by pastoral tribes. At a very 
early period a Turanian race, called the Bak, near the south-east 
Caspian, connected with the Akkadians of Chaldea, and receiving 
from them their civilisation, settled in China and were the founders 
of Chinese civilisation and literature, 2 the first king of whom we hear 
was Fohi then Hwang-to then Yaou, who is supposed to have 
lived 2,300 B.C. His empire extended from 23 to 40 north, and 
from 6 west of Pekin to 10 east of Pekin. The capital was Ke-choo 
in Shantung. The Shang dynasty succeeded 1766 B.C.; the Chow 
dynasty, under Woo-Wang, 1,121 B.C. Their founder divided China 
into seventy-two feudal states, which led to a series of internecine 
wars. 

13. RELIGIOUS HISTORY. The origin of idolatry, whether in 
Tsabaism, the adoration of the heavenly bodies, or in the symbolism 
of the divine attributes, or in the reverence for ancestry, or in the 
honours paid to the memories of deceased heroes and national bene- 
factors, or in the corruption of patriarchal traditions, or in the 
puzzles of philosophy in its efforts to account satisfactorily for either 
natural phenomena or for moral evil, is one of the questions of the 
day which will probably never be answered satisfactorily. Its varied 
manifestations are matters of history, and some of them have been 
already noticed in the case of the Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, 
and Phoenicians. The Greek polytheism (substantially common to 
the Roman and Italic people) is in its bare, matter-of-fact details 
familiar to every schoolboy. We may quote Grote's impartial 
account : "The mythical world of the Greeks opens with the gods, 
anterior as well as superior to man : it gradually descends, first to 
heroes, and next to the human race. Along with the gods are 
found various monstrous natures, ultra-human and extra-human, who 



1 Wheeler's " History of India," vol. iii. pp. 61-3 : Taiboys. 

2 See Quarterly Review ', No. 307, July, 1882. 

3 See the letters of M. Terrien de la Couperie in the Academy, October and 
November, 1883. 



4< 5 First Period. 

cannot with propriety be called gods, but who partake with gods and 
men in the attributes of volition, conscious agency, and suscepti- 
bility of pleasure and pain-such as the Harpies, the Gorgons .... 
Sirens . . Cyclopes .... the Centaurs, &c. The first acts of 
what may be termed the great mythical cycle describe the proceed- 
ings of these gigantic agents the crash and collision of certain 
over-boiling forces, which are ultimately reduced to obedience, or 
chained up or extinguished under the more orderly government of 
Zeus, who supplants his less capable predecessors, and acquires 
precedence and supremacy over gods and men subject, however, to 
certain social restraints from the chief gods and goddesses around 
him, as well as to the custom of occasionally convoking and con- 
sulting the divine agora." . . . . " The inmates of this divine world 
are conceived upon the model, but not upon the scale of the 
human. They are actuated by the full play and variety of those 
appetites, sympathies, passions and affections which divide the soul 
of man": they are "invested with a far larger and indeterminate 
measure of power, and an exemption as well from death as (with 
some rare exceptions) from suffering and infirmity." 1 The Greek 
mythology probably arose from personification of the forms of 
nature, and by additions received from the Theologies and Theo- 
gonies of the Phoenicians and the Egyptians. As a superstition it 
had a firm hold on the masses, maintained by its festivals, pro- 
cessions, and sacrifices, and by the necessity of believing in some- 
thing besides and above material existence. As a religion it never 
satisfied the educated and thoughtful. Such took from it what 
appeared to them calculated to meet their spiritual aspirations, or 
became the followers of the philosophical teachers who laboured to 
reconcile the religious myths with scientific researches and human 
reason. In Italy there was by far a deeper religious feeling than in 
Greece. Practically the Greeks and Romans were fatalists. Even 
Zeus is the minister of a stern necessity. Morality lost not a little 
by the examples furnished in the popular histories of the gods and 
goddesses of Olympus. The fear of retribution through the action 
of the Furies operated to some extent in checking the commission 
of great crimes, but was not generally associated with the sort of 
future life described by the poets. The Greek mysteries were " frag- 
mentary glimpses of future retribution : as also are the doctrines of 
the unity of God and of atonement by sacrifice .... the con- 
sciousness of guilt was not indeed first taught by them, but was felt 

1 Grote, vol. i. pp. i, 3. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 47 

generally, and felt very keenly by the Greek mind. These mysteries 
were its gospel of reconciliation with the offended gods." 1 If we 
judge the idolatrous systems by their fruits as seen in the generally 
depraved character of the common people in Egypt, the East, and 
even in Greece and Rome, our language must be highly condemna- 
tory. See also St. Paul (Romans i. 18-32) a true picture of the 
heathen morality of the day. In the early ages, and in the more 
simple form of idolatry, the aberrations of the intellect might be 
less connected with the depravation of the heart, and the moral 
evils of the system might be corrected to some extent by the tradi- 
tions of the patriarchal ages. There were also many exceptions to 
the prevalent errors of the age in men " who feared God and worked 
righteousness" and as such were "accepted of him" (Acts x. 34, 35; 
xvii. 20; Romans ii. 14, 15). The fashion now is to find some deep, 
profound philosophy in connexion with all heathenish systems : the 
fact is that too often these learned men, in their inquiries, are insen- 
sibly led to find what they bring to them, the reflex of their own 
preconceived conclusions and theories. 

14. LITERATURE implies the art of writing for its conservation. But 
of the changes in language after the first dispersion of the human 
race we have no history, except what philologists infer by a com- 
parison of the varied dialects of human speech. Pictorial writing 
from simple signs, such as were found in Mexico and among the 
North American Indians, up to the complex Egyptian hieroglyphics, 
preceded the discovery of alphabetical writing. The learned have 
come to the conclusion that all existing alphabets have been derived 
from the Egyptian hieroglyphics. The Phoenicians have the credit 
of first perceiving " the advantage of one definite symbol for one 
sound, and the disadvantage of a dozen." 3 From their alphabet 
all the alphabets now used have been formed. The discovery 
of the alphabet may fairly be regarded as the most difficult as 
well as the most fruitful of all the past achievements of the 
human intellect. There have been in fact five other great 
systems of picture writing, (i) The Egyptian in five varieties, (2) 
the cuneiform in nine varieties, (3) the Chinese in five varieties, (4) 
the Mexican in two varieties, and (5) the Khita in four varieties. 
But to use these systems requires the labours of a life. To invent 
and bring to perfection our alphabet has proved to be the most 
arduous enterprise in which the human intellect has ever been 

1 Mahaffy, " Rambles in Greece," pp. 20, 21. 
" Encyc. Brit," ninth edition, vol. i. p. 607. 



48 



First Period. 



engaged. Its achievement taxed the genius of the three most gifted 
races of the ancient world. It was begun by the Egyptians, con- 
tinued by the Shemites, and finally perfected by the Greeks. To 
show that from certain hieroglyphic pictures, which were in use long 
before the Pyramids were erected, it is possible to deduce the actual 
outlines of almost every letter of our modem English alphabet, is 
the object of the Rev. I. Taylor's work on the alphabet. 1 As early 
as the Second Dynasty the Egyptians had solved the hardest problem 
of all, the conception of a pure consonant, which involves the 
essential principles of alphabetic writing, but they advanced no 
farther. It was reserved for the genius of an alien race (the 
Phoenicians) finally to reject every vestige of homophones and 
polyphones, of ideogram and syllabics, and boldly to rely on one 
single sign for the notation of each consonantal sound. When 
alphabetical writing was first invented we do not know, but in 
Western Asia the art was probably in use before the time of Abra- 
ham. In EGYPT the enchorial character of the hieroglyphic writing 
superseded the more pictorial character before the seventh century 
B.C. The ISRAELITES in the time of MOSES were acquainted with 
alphabetical characters, having, no doubt, acquired them in their set- 
tlement in the north-east of Egypt, with which PHOENICIAN traders 
and Shemitish pastoral tribes came frequently in contact. They had 
the documents which now form the Pentateuch, the books of Joshua 
and the Judges, together with Ruth, and the book of faster (now 
lost), possibly also the book of Job. EGYPT had an extensive litera- 
ture, of which only a very minute portion has been deciphered and 
translated. The writings are historical, geographical, theological and 
moral discourses, poetry, letters, and romances; the mathematical 
sciences, as astronomy and geometry, were cultivated, so also medi- 
cine. Magic and astrology had a mighty hold on the minds of all 
classes. One of the most important of the papyri is one of the 
oldest, thought to be nearly as old as the monarchy ; it is called 
"the ritual of the dead," but the Egyptian title was " the manifestation 
ofUght," or, in other words, "the book revealing light to the soul." 
There is a small epic of about 120 lines by Pentaour, the poet, on 
the exploits of Rameses II. in his war with the Hittites (about 
1360 B.C. ; also a sort of tour in Syria about 1400 B.C., very meagre 
in the information it gives us. The short poems, letters, and 
romances constitute of themselves a large literature, but as yet we 
have access only to a small number. PHOENICIAN literature is all 

1 2 vols. 8vo. 1883. 



The Earliest Nations up to 1000 B.C. 49 

lost. Sundry writers quoted by Josephus, and references to Mokhos 
and Sanchoniathon, historians who are said to have lived before 
the Trojan War, are all that remain. The remnants of certain 
CHALDEAN poems and legends (preserved in the Assyrian library 
of Assur-bani-pal, 670 B.C.) give us, among other things, the Epic 
of Isdubahr and the Legend of the Creation, which belong to this 
epoch, besides many other works, recorded on tablets, which have 
not yet been prepared for the public eye. In IRAN (Persia) the 
Zend Avesta, the sacred book of the early Persians ; in INDIA, the 
Vedas, the earliest of the sacred books of the Hindus, were no 
doubt in existence from 1000 B.C. to 1500 B.C., if not earlier. The 
tendency of the learned is to bring these works much nearer to the 
fifth century B.C. They represent, however, the views of the Persians 
and the Hindus at the very beginning of their national existence. 
In CHINA the book Y-King " the book of Changes," now unin- 
telligible to the most learned of the Chinese, is attributed to Fuhi, 
called also Mih-hi, whose date is from 2852 B.C. to 2737 B.C. In 
the Akkadian Syllaberies there is said to be a key to the explication 
of this book, interesting especially as showing the early remote 
connexion between the first settlement in Chaldea and the founders 
and fathers of Chinese civilisation. 



State of the Known World 1000 B.C. 

EUROPE. 

SCANDINAVIA : Settled by Finnish and Tschudic races. 

GAUL, Britain, and Central Europe : The Kelts in Gaul, the Germans 
in the east of the Rhine, followed and pushed forward by 
the SdavonianS) who occupied Eastern Europe. 

SPAIN : By Kelts, also by Iberians (Berbers from Africa). The 
Phoenicians had settled colonies in the south of Spain at a very 
early period, at Gades, Carteia, Malaga, &c. ; also in Sardinia, 
Corsica, and the Balearic Islands. 

ITALY : North of the Po, the Gauls (Kelts), the Ligurians along 
the Mediterranean towards Gaul, the Etruscans (Rasena) 
from the north. The origin of this people very uncertain ; 
they occupied the west centre of Italy, In the centre the 
Umbrian, Oscan, Sabellian, and other tribes nearly related, 
supposed to have descended from the Sclavonic Lithuanians^ 
E 



- First Period. 

and to have been mixed up with the Kelts, the Siculi, 
Sicani, and Pelasgic races. In the south the old Pelasgic 
population, originally from Greece, as the CEnotnans, lapy- 
gians, and other tribes. 

GREECE: Under the declining rule of the petty kings (Greek 
or Phoenico-Egyptian Dynasties). Phoenician colonies, or 
marts in Cyprus, Crete, Rhodes, the Cycladesmmes of 
Thasos, Siphnos, and Cimolus (gold and silver) worked by 
Phoenicians. 

A supposed Libyo-Pelasgic Confederacy, 1800 to 1400 B.C., 
opposed the progress of the Phoenicians in the Mediterranean 
(according to Lenormant). 

ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR : The Dardanian kingdom Troy (1400 or 1144 B.C.) by 
an Hellenic race; Phrygia: Midas I. reigned before the 
Trojan War ; Lydia : The first Dynasty, the Atydse, ended 
1232 B.C.; the Heraclidse succeeded; the Carians, a powerful 
race. 

PHOENICIA : Sidon, very ancient (though Marathos is perhaps prior), 
was destroyed by the Philistines, 1209. Tyre, f. 2750 or 
2267, then became the chief of all the Phoenician towns in 
1150: Colonies in Greece and the Islands, in Malta, in 
North Africa, in Spain : their ships explored the Euxine 
and traded at Colchis for metals, gold from the Ural, 
with hides and furs ; also by the Red Sea, into Arabia and 
India : they were generally friends and allies of Egypt, which 
needed the help of their fleets. 

SYRIA : Various tribes, mainly under the Khita (Hittites), whose 
power extended from Armenia, and perhaps part of Asia 
Minor, along the west side of the Euphrates. 

ISRAEL, under Solomon, ruled over Syria to the Euphrates, over 

Philistia, Edom, Moab, and other tribes. 
ASSYRIA : The kings of Nineveh extended their territories to the 

Mediterranean 1120 B.C.; at the close of this period their 

power was lessened by the revolts of many of their formerly 

subject nations. 

BABYLON had been conquered by the Assyrians 1271 B.C., but soon 
became independent, though it remained a secondary power 
until the seventh century B.C. 



State of the Known World 1000 B.C. 51 

MEDIA : Elam, Persia, and Iran, which extended to the Indus 
first settled by Turanians then, by degrees, occupied by the 
Indo-European races, between 2500-1200 B.C. : Bactria, an 
important kingdom. 

ARABIA : Its independent tribes in the north and centre. Yemen, 
the seat of a large trade from Asia, and by the Phoenicians 
and Kita, with Armenia and Europe. 

INDIA : The Indo-European race predominant, and pushing its 
way southwards. The Turanian or Dravidian race in the 
south : other Turanian races in the north and centre of the 
Peninsula. 

CHINA : Under the Chow Dynasty, which had divided China among 
seventy-two feudal states, occupying about one-half of what 
is now called China in our map. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT was under the Priest Kings of the twenty-first Dynasty, noo 
to 975 B.C. 

LIBYA (the Ribu) : inhabited by tribes, of which the Maxyes were 
the most powerful : probably an Indo-European people 
white, blue eyes, fair hair A company of Libyans, Greeks, 
Ligurians, Siculi, &c., under Marmaiu, an African. These 
Libyans had settled in Libya at a very early period, and had 
subdued an older population. 

ETHIOPIA (the Soudan), frequently subject to Egypt, but often 
independent. It was settled by the Cushites in the time 
of the eleventh and twelfth Dynasties subjected by the 
eighteenth and nineteenth Dynasties. There was a kingdom 
at Meroe and another at Napata (Mount Berkel), which were 
great emporiums for trade with Arabia and India. The 
population was Cushite, a branch of the same race in Arabia. 

CARTHAGE : Originally a settlement of the Sidonians, called Cambe; 
then, before 1200 B.C., called Carthage. From this point 
colonies were sent to South Spain, Corsica, Sardinia, the 
Balearic Isles, and Malta. 

While Ethiopian races spread over the south and east of Africa, the 
Berber races (Indo-European in their origin) occupied the 
Sahara and the interior tracts of all North Africa. They are 
supposed to have first colonised the south of Spain. 
E 2 



SECOND PERIOD. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 
539 B.C. 



i. AT the commencement of this period the great powers of EGYPT 
and ASSYRIA were for a season powerless owing to revolutions in 
their respective dynasties. The ISRAELITISH kingdom under 
Solomon ruled from Egypt and the Red Sea to the Euphrates, appa- 
rently on friendly terms with the KHITA (i Kings x. 29). But, on 
the death of Solomon, the revolt of Jeroboam, aided by the King 
of Egypt, established the kingdom of the Ten Tribes (that of 
ISRAEL), while the two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, formed the 
kingdom of JUDAH, under Rehoboam, the son of Solomon. The 
Israelitish people were thus taught that their mission was not one 
either of foreign conquest or of imperial power ; they were to under- 
stand their position as that of a people intrusted with the divine 
oracles, while enduring a long period of national humiliation. All 
the conquests of David were lost ; the Syrians, Moabiles, Ammonites, 
IdumeatiS) and others resumed their former independent positions. 
The kingdom of ISRAEL lasted, amid many changes of dynasties, 255 
years, and became to a very great extent idolatrous, though the 
sacrifices and ritual of the Mosaic law were partially maintained. 
Nineteen kings in all reigned in Israel, which was a purely military 
monarchy. JUDAH was governed by twenty kings from Rehoboam 
to the last of the kings of the house of David, Zedekiah, who was 
carried captive to Babylon 587 B.C. Of these Asa, Jehosophat, 
Uzziah, Jotham, Hezekiah, and Josiah, six in all, were loyal to the 
maintenance of the worship of Jehovah. All the others, both in 
Judah and Israel, gave way to the gross idolatry and to the licentious 
and cruel worship of the Canaanitish nations; and this apostasy was 
not the result of the exercise of kingly tyranny, but of the love of 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 53 

the people for the idolatries of its neighbours. The kings and the 
ruling class both of Judah and Israel were thus, with a few excep- 
tions, a disgrace to humanity. Two prophetical teachers and public 
opponents of idolatry, who may be called the tribunes of Jehovah, 
the true kings of Israel, were raised up to testify to the guilt of the 
kings and people : ELIJAH from 910 B.C. to 897 B.C., ELISHA from 
897 B.C. to 838 B.C. After these remarkable men Hosea, Amos, and 
Josiah laboured, and protested, and prophesied in ISRAEL ; while in 
JUDAHy<?/, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, 
and Zephaniah exercised the office of protesters against idolatry, 
remonstrants against the sins of the kings and people, and advocates 
for the pure worship of Jehovah ; thus calling the attention of the 
people to their peculiar privileges and grand destiny, which they 
were counteracting by their unfaithfulness and idolatry. Besides 
these, Ezekiel and Daniel were the prophets of the Jews while in 
captivity at Babylon. This prophetic dispensation was, in fact, the 
divine administration of the theocratic government. By these 
prophets JEHOVAH, the king of the Israelitish people, declared His 
will : " These prophets were never patriots of the common stamp, 
to whom national interests stand higher than the absolute claims of 
religion and humanity The things for which Elijah con- 
tended were of far more worth than the national existence of Israel, 
and it is a higher wisdom than that of patriotism which insists that 
divine truth and civil righteousness are more than all the counsels 
of statecraft. Judged from a mere political point of view, Elijah's 
work had no other result than to open a way for the bloody and 
unscrupulous ambition of Jehu, and lay bare the frontiers of the 
land to the ravages of the ferocious Hazael. But with him the 
religion of Jehovah had already reached a point where it could no 
longer be judged by a mere national standard, and the truths of 
which he was the champion were not the less true because the issue 
made it plain that the cause of Jehovah could not triumph without 
destroying the old Hebrew state. Nay, without the destruction of 
the state, the religion of Israel could never have given birth to a 
religion for all mankind ; and it was precisely the incapacity of Israel 
to carry out the higher truths of religion in national forms which 
brought into clearer and clearer prominence those things in the faith 
of Jehovah which are independent of every national condition, 
and make Jehovah the God, not of Israel alone, but of all the 
earth." 1 In the writings of these prophets, which make one-fourth 

1 W. Robertson Smith, "Prophets of Israel," pp. 78, 79, I2mo. 1882. 



54 Second Period. 

of the volume of the Old Testament, we have a vivid picture of the 
moral corruption, and the political servility, and treachery and false- 
hood of the kings, the priests, the nobles, and the people. Placed 
between the great powers of their age, EGYPT on the one hand and 
ASSYRIA and BABYLON on the other, the smaller states as Israel, 
Judah, Syria, &c., always disunited, were thus incapable of main- 
taining the balance of power betwen these two empires ; on the 
contrary, they were tempted to invite the interference of one or 
other of these great powers in their petty rivalries. The insincere 
state policy of the kings of Judah, especially in their readiness to 
yield and take oaths of fidelity to the predominant power, whether 
Egypt, or Assyria, or Babylon, and the equal facility with which 
these oaths were broken, makes one rejoice in the just judgment by 
which the national existence of both Israel and Judah terminated 
in the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. The prophets were, 
under all circumstances, the advocates of truth, sincerity, and faith- 
fulness in political life, and suffered much persecution for their 
uncompromising opposition to the tergiversations of the kings and 
people, as we may observe in the case of the prophets Isaiah and 
Jeremiah. The kingdom of Egypt was revived under Shishouk 
(Shishack) of the twenty-second Dynasty, who invaded, took, and 
plundered Jerusalem and 133 cities of JUDAH after the death of 
SOLOMON, 976 or 981 B.C., when, after the death of Shishack, Azerch- 
Amen (Zerah the Ethiopian) invaded JUDAH 940 B.C., he was de- 
feated (2 Chron. xiv. 9-15). These movements from the west should 
have taught the two kingdoms of ISRAEL and JUDAH, the PHOENI- 
CIANS, and the petty kingdoms of SYRIA to unite for their mutual 
defence against both EGYPT and ASSYRIA, knowing, as they did, that 
their position placed them in the debatable land in which for 
centuries past these two imperial powers had contended for the 
mastery. But their rivalries blinded them to the sense of danger, 
and led them to appeal to ASSYRIA for help against their rivals, thus 
hastening the period of their subjection and final extinction. 

2. The empire of ASSYRIA was revived by Assur-dan 940 B.C. 
Assur-nazi-pal, 885 B.C., re-established his frontiers as far as the 
Mediterranean, which the Assyrians had lost for 200 years. In 
745 B.C. a new dynasty began with Tiglath - Pileser //., who 
enlarged and consolidated the empire. In 743 B.C. he held a court 
at Arpad, to which both Syria and Israel sent representatives to pay 
homage to him as their suzerain. As the friend of Ahaz, king of 
Judah, who sought his aid against Israel and Syria, this monarch 
took Damascus, and thus destroyed the rule of the Benhadad family 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 55 

740 B.C. Shalmanezer IV., one of his generals, succeeded 727 
B.C: ; he blockaded Tyre several years, and died while besieging 
Samaria, the capital of the kings of Israel, 723-2 B.C. SARGON, 
another general, seized the power, took Samaria 720 B.C., and put an 
end to the kingdom of Israel ; then, on his road to invade Egypt, 
he conquered the Philistines, and defeated the Egyptians under 
Sabaco the Ethiopian, at Raphia, 720 B.C. The KHITA were next 
subdued, and their chief towns, Kadesh and Carchemish, taken and 
destroyed 720-717 B.C. In 711 he took Ashdod and Jerusalem, 
making Hezekiah his tributary (see Isaiah x. 6, 12, 22, 24, 34). Sen- 
nacherib succeeded 705 B.C. He again threatened Jerusalem, and 
was about to enter Egypt, when his army was miraculously destroyed 
701 B.C. (Isaiah xxxvi. xxxvii.). This event is noticed in the Egyptian 
annals, and ascribed to their gods. Babylon, never satisfied under 
Assyrian rule, was reconquered by him. In his wars he took eighty- 
nine fortified cities and 820 minor places in Babylonia, with Babylon 
itself, which he defaced and partially burnt, 691 B.C. Esarhaddon 
succeeded 681 B.C. He took Manasseh, king of Judah, to Babylon, 
but after a while restored him, 676 B.C. Babylon was rebuilt by him 
and beautified, and was his favourite place of abode. Tyre, as the 
friend of Egypt, was again blockaded. EGYPT, under Tirhakah, was 
conquered 672 B.C., and divided into twenty satrapies ; two rebellions 
were followed by fresh subjugations 669 B.C. Assur-bani-pal) the 
successor of Esarhaddon, had to reconquer Egypt. Thebes (No- 
Ammon) was destroyed, and the ground strewed with its ruins, as 
foretold in Nahum iii. S-io. Tirhakah fled to Ethiopia, but he and 
his son again raised a rebellion, and for the fourth time the Assyrian 
authority had to be re-established by arms. These expeditions, fol- 
lowed by a revolt of the Assyrian soldiery, and by the rebellion of 
the MEDES and the BABYLONIANS 652 B.C., exhausted the resources 
of the Assyrian empire. The EGYPTIANS also revolted under 
Psammetikos of Sais, assisted by Ionian and Karian mercenaries 
sent by Gyges, king of Lydia. Esarhaddon II. (Sarakos) succeeded 
625 B.C., the inroads of the barbarous Kimmerians diverted the 
Medes and Babylonians for a few years, but in 606 B.C. the city of 
Nineveh was besieged by the Medes and Babylonians, taken and 
destroyed 606 B.C. The MEDES had begun to assert their inde- 
pendence in 740, and again in 633 B.C., BABYLON under Nabo- 
polassar in 625. The KIMMERIANS properly belong to the barbarous 
tribes north of the Black Sea, who had fled from more powerful 
Scythian tribes. They were the precursors of that great northern 
swell of population which at that time, and for ages after, troubled 



5 6 Second Period. 

civilised Asia and Europe. This irruption is noticed by the Greek 
poet Kallinicos 634 B.C., and also by the Hebrew prophets Zephaniah 
(i.), and Jeremiah (i. 13-16; vi. 22-25). The large mounds 
now found on the site of Nineveh, washed as they have been by 
the rain of 2,500 years, have preserved to us the remains of the 
buildings of the Assyrian monarchs, they explain to us the character 
of the civilisation of the Assyrian nation. The principal prophecies 
which refer to the fall of Assyria are Isaiah x. 5 ; xiv. 25 ; xxx. 8, 9 ; 
Zephaniah ii. 13-15 ; Ezekielxxxi. 11-16 ; Nahum iii. 6, 7. The civi- 
lisation of Assyria was derived from Babylon, its literature was that 
of the old Turanian Akkads, translated into the Assyrian Shemitish 
dialect. The first Assyrian library was established at Calah 1300 
B.C.; the greatest library was established by Assur-bani-pal at 
Nineveh 670 B.C., it had 30,000 tablets. This library had a cata- 
logue, the tablets were arranged methodically and numbered. 
Among other works is the great Babylonian epic, which incorporates 
in the adventures of Isdubahr the history of the flood and the ark 
in which Xisurthus was saved, the building of Babel, the confusion 
of tongues, and the dispersion of the human race. The legend of 
the creation also, as well as the history of the flood, are obviously 
from the old traditions existing long before the time of Abraham, 
preserved in the patriarchal families, and recorded for us in the 
book of Genesis ; mythologies, treatises on geography, astronomy, 
astrology, natural history also. The religious poems appear to have 
-been written after the Shemites had succeeded in considerably 
modifying the old spirit worship of the Akkadians. "The old 
.sorcerer gave way to the priest, and the adoration of kings to the 
worship of abstractions, and the people began to adore special 
deities, such as the sun-god, the moon-god, and the sky." The 
Shemites probably introduced with the worship of Assur a pantheon 
of gods, the teaching respecting conviction of sin and the need of 
a Redeemer. The oldest code of laws is an Akkadian one, records 
of a banking-house in Babylon of a firm which existed through five 
generations, and sundry cheques. 1 The city of Nineveh was a sort 
of province enclosed in walls 100 feet high, defended by 1,500 
towers 200 feet high, the walls so thick that three chariots might be 
driven abreast with ease; these walls, i8f miles long and n broad, 
were in circuit 60 miles. Hence it is described in Jonah as "an 
exceeding great city of three days' journey " (Jonah iii. 3). That 
which strikes us most .... is the unbounded command of naked 

1 Set "Assyrian Life and History," M. E. Harkness. Translation. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 57 

human strength possessed by these early kings, and the effect of 
mere mass and indefatigable perseverance, unaided either by theory 
or by artifice, in the accomplishment of gigantic results." 1 

3. There were now left four great powers in Western Asia, 
including Egypt, which was politically an Asiatic power. These 
were BABYLON, the MEDES and PERSIANS, EGYPT, and LYDIA. If 
LYDIA had had time to consolidate its resources, and had known 
how to conciliate and employ the skill of its Greek neighbours, it 
might have established a power intermediate between European and 
Asiatic civilisation, to the great benefit of the old world. But, having 
come prematurely in collision with the MEDES, it was conquered by 
Cyrus the PERSIAN, 554 B.C. EGYPT had already secured its inde- 
pendence of Assyria, and had shaken off the Ethiopian Dynasty, 
648 B.C. ("The Priests of Noph," Isaiah xix. 13), and was quite 
prepared to contend with Babylon, as before with ASSYRIA, for the 
lordship over Palestine and Syria. 

4. NEBUCHADNEZZAR, the successor of Nabopolassar, followed 
the old policy of the Assyrian kings, and opposed the attempts 
of the kings of EGYPT to reassert their claim to Assyria and 
to the region west of the Euphrates. Pharaoh Necho^ having 
advanced as far as Megiddo on his way, was opposed by 
Josiah, the excellent king of Judah, the faithful vassal of the king 
of Babylon, and was there slain, 610 B.C. Necho then placed 
Jehoiachim on the throne of Jerusalem. This prince had to submit 
to Nebuchadnezzar, who captured Jerusalem 606 B.C., and sent away 
Daniel and many other captives to Babylon. From this year is 
dated the beginning of the Babylonish captivity (Jeremiah 
xlvi. 1-12). In spite of the opposition of Jeremiah the Prophet, 
Jehoiachim revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, relying upon the help 
of Egypt, 602 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, delayed by other wars, could 
not avenge this insult until 597, when he took Jerusalem and put 
Jehoiachim to death, placing Jehoiachin, a child (called also 
Jeconiah and Coniah), in his room, who only reigned three months 
and ten days. His mother and the leading chiefs again were led by 
the Egyptian idolatrous party to rebel; but in 5 9 7-8 Nebuchadnezzar 
took Jerusalem and carried the king and royal family, with 10,000, 
in captivity to Babylon ; among them was Ezekiel the prophet. 
Zedekiah, the youngest son of Josiah, was made king by Nebuchad- 
nezzar (Ezekiel xvii. 13, 14). Infatuated by false prophets 
(2 Chronicles xxxvi. 13), and relying upon Egypt, like his predecessors, 

1 Grote, vol. iii. p. 405. 



c3 Second Period. 

he declared against Babylon. This was followed by the siege and 
capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, 587 or 586 B.C. Zedekiah 
was blinded, his sons and the princes of Judah slaughtered, and 
himself sent a prisoner to Babylon. Other leading men and sixty 
others of the people were put to death, and Jerusalem itself was 
destroyed by fire, the walls broken down, the temple and the city 
left a mere ruin. TYRE was taken 573 B.C., according to the 
prophecy of Amos (who lived 787 B.C.) 1.9-10; Isaiah (who lived 
713 B.C.) xxiii. 1-15 ; Ezekiel xxvi. to xxviii. Egypt, under Apries 
(Hophra), was fearfully ravaged, and reduced to great distress, and 
Ethiopia also. The conquest of Egypt by the Assyrians and 
Babylonians was foretold by Isaiah, xix. 1-16; xx. 1-6; by Jeremiah, 
xliii. 10-13 ; xliv. 29-30 ; xlvi. 13-26. Ezekiel forewarned Egypt, 
xxix. to xxxii. The conquest of Ethiopia was foretold by Isaiah 
(xx. 1-6), and by Zephaniah (ii. 12). The empire of Nebuchadnezzar 
was the largest, the richest, and the most compact and powerful of 
any which the world had yet seen. In his reign the intercourse with 
Greece, through Asia Minor, had become not infrequent. We hear 
of a Greek named Artimenides, the brother of the poet Alcaeus, who 
served in the army of Nebuchadnezzar. 1 

DANIEL THE PROPHET was reared in the court of Nebuchad- 
nezzar, by whom he appears to have been highly esteemed and 
trusted, and upon whose hasty and indomitable spirit he may 
have exercised a beneficial influence. (The remarkable prophecy 
of Daniel (ch. ii.) is a sketch of the future changes of political 
power in the world. Babylon, Persia, Macedonia, Greece, and 
even the last empire, the iron rule of Rome, should give way to 
a rule of moral and spiritual influences the rule of Christ. This 
kingdom is now gradually, though slowly and imperceptibly, ad- 
vancing in the world, and preparing the way for a rule of spiritual 
influences, and of justice and morality. In a subsequent revelation 
the real character of the four grand empires is set before us. They 
are presented in the similitude of savage beasts, denoting the divine 
condemnation of their rapine and cruelty (Daniel vii. 1-7). The 
captive Jews in Babylon appear to have been liberally treated, 
Many became rich and prosperous, and the major part of them 
became attached to territory bordering on the Euphrates, and 
eventually chose it for their country. They were thoroughly cured 
of their tendency to idolatry. Gradually the Jewish people were 
dispersed over all Western Asia, Egypt, Greece, and Italy, carrying 

Grote, vol. iii. i2mo. edition, p. 302. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 59 

with them their spiritual news of the divine nature, completely 
free from all Polytheistic errors. 1 

The new BABYLONIAN KINGDOM thus became an empire under 
the rule of Nebuchadnezzar, who has left an impression of a high 
statesmanlike character, and of the possession of singular excellences 
above the contemporary kings his neighbours. By him Babylon 
was enlarged and beautified : the walls were estimated at from 40 to 
60 miles in circuit, 32 to 75 feet thick, and from 150 to 365 feet in 
height (varying in thickness and height, no doubt, according to the 
necessities of the locality). The grand temple of Belus occupied a 
site which was a square, each side 1200 feet. A tower, 600 feet 
square, rose 1800 feet. The streets were laid out in straight lines, 
enclosing large squares of arable and garden land. Numerous canals 
running along most of the leading streets furnished supplies of water 
for domestic uses and for irrigation. He made a road from Babylon 
through the Western Desert to Sela and Elath, far shorter than the 
old caravan route by Tadmor and Damascus. Thus Babylon was 
again a centre of trade, where all the caravans from Cilicia, and the 
north and west, and from Syria and Palestine touched the Euphrates. 
The maritime trade was either direct from Babylon, through the 
Persian Gulf, or through Gerrha, a port on the west side of the gulf, 
which was an entrepot of the PHOENICIANS. This city, at one time a 
very large one, is the Dedan of the Bible (Jeremiah xxv. 23 ; 
Ezekiel xxv. 13) a people who occupied the city and the islands 
in the bay (the Bahrein Islands). The navigation extended to the 
Red Sea and the east coast of Africa, and to Ceylon and southern 
India. This trade and navigation from the Persian Gulf, so 
prized by Nebuchadnezzar, was afterwards discouraged by the 
Persians, who feared attacks on Babylon and Susa, which, not having 
any fleet, they would be unable to repel. The land trade was by 
roads westward to the Mediterranean, northward to Armenia and 
the Black Sea, and eastern and north-eastern to India and China. 
Babylon had from the earliest period been the seat of textile manu- 
factures in wool, cotton, and linen, and for articles of gold and silver 
workmanship, engraved stones, rich carpets. The Jews, as well as 
the Greeks, while revelling in the descriptions of the wealth and 
magnificence of Babylon, testify to its luxurious indulgences and 
immorality. The death of Nebuchadnezzar was followed by the 
decline of his empire. Evil-Merodach, who succeeded 561 B.C., was 
followed by incompetent rulers. The Medes and Persians, under 

1 See Dr. Pusey, " The Prophecies of Daniel," 8vo. 



(5o Second Period. 

Cyrus, besieged and took Babylon 539 B.C. Nabonadius (Nabonadus) 
the king was heading the Babylonian army outside. He was defeated 
by Cyrus (who gave him a principality in Carmania). Belshazzar 
was the associate of Nabonadius left in charge of the city. 1 This 
explains why Daniel was appointed to be third ruler of the state 
(Daniel v. 29). Cyrus led his army through the empty bed of the 
Euphrates, by the water gates, "and the more distant parts of the city 
were on fire long before the news reached the palace, perhaps before 
Daniel had finished expounding the writing on the wall " 3 (Jeremiah 
li. 30-32). Darius the Mede was placed in charge of Babylon, while 
Cyrus was otherwise engaged. It is very difficult to identify this Darius, 
and there is some obscurity in the details of the sieges of Babylon and 
the position of Cyrus, but the whole power of the empire of the Medes 
and Persians was eventually concentrated in the person of CYRUS. 
(The following prophecies refer to the destruction and present con- 
dition of Babylon : Isaiah xiii. 1-22; xiv. 14-23; xlv. 1-6; xlvii. 1-15; 
Jeremiah 1. and li.) There is great obscurity in the history of the 
fall of Babylon. The statements of both Herodotus, Xenophon, and 
Abydenus are contradicted by some inscriptions on the clay bricks, 
recently discovered, which affirm a peacable occupation of Babylon 
by Cyrus, after a battle with Nabonidus. It is probable that these 
inscriptions may be the history modified to gratify the national 
vanity. We have patriotic histories of the peninsular war which 
attribute the expulsion of the French to the bravery of the Spaniards, 
forgetting the English army under Wellington. Cyrus may have 
thought it politic to humour the vanity of the Babylonians. Sayce 
thinks that the Darius of the book of Daniel was Darius Hystaspes. 

5. GREECE AND THE HELLENIC WORLD. By the Trojan war, and 
by the colonies settled in Asia Minor, and by occasional intercourse 
with EGYPT and PHOENICIA and LIBYA, the Greeks were brought 
more frequently in contact with the more advanced world of 
the East and South. By the KHITA the commodities of the East, 
and the superior manufactures of ASSYRIA and BABYLON, had been 
carried in caravans to the JEgean coast, and thence to Greece. With 
the exception of MACEDONIA, a new kingdom carved out by a 
Grecian adventurer, Perdikkas, of the royal race of Argos, in the 
ninth century B.C., all the governments had become Republican. 
He and his warlike successors established this small state, which 
waited the proper time for aggrandisement. The government was 
monarchic, after the fashion of the Homeric age, checked by a 

1 Max-Duncker, vol. vi. p. 81. Student's History," p. 528. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 61 

Council of Chiefs. In all the Doric states in the Peloponnesus, the 
Doric conquerors had reduced the old inhabitants (the Greeks who 
had been the glory of the heroic ages) to an inferior political position, 
and in some cases, as in Sparta, a large portion of them became 
Helots, slaves of the most degraded character. So in Thessaly, and 
in other states where the rulers were a military caste, lording it over 
the industrious classes. In all the Grecian states the citizens of the 
towns seemed to claim a superiority over the country people, and in 
the cities only the favoured possessors of the citizenship had any 
share in the administration. The religion of the Greeks, " anthro- 
pomorphic polytheism," though singularly beautiful, so much as to 
extort the regrets of Hume and Gibbon that it could not be revived, 
" being mainly a product of imagination and the aesthetic sense, with 
no depth of root either in the reason or conscience, with feeble 
philosophical and moral power and possibilities, has no claim to be 
regarded as a great religion, and indeed would seem to have been, 
in some measure, outgrown by the Greek mind when Homer wrote." * 
Whatever there was of moral or religious power in the Greek religion 
was traceable to the old traditions of the fathers of the race, im- 
proved and enriched in after-ages by glimpses of a pure theology, 
gathered by some of their travellers from intercourse with the East. 
The mass of the people were superstitious in the extreme, from 
which also the higher classes were not exempt; while popular 
theology, or rather mythology, of the poets and of the legends had 
little influence. Perhaps local superstitions had greater hold within 
the sphere of their action than all the deities of Olympus. The 
strongest bond of religious union was the attachment to particular 
sanctuaries and to the common worship or festivals connected with 
them. Hence, the Olympian games, celebrated every four years on 
the Alpheus in Elis, which claim an antiquity long preceding the 
Trojan war, reinstituted by Iphitus 277 B.C., with the JVemean, 
celebrated at Nemea in Argolis, and the Isthmian, celebrated on the 
Corinthian Isthmus, twice in every Olympic these claim a high 
antiquity also. The Pythian were established by the Amphictyons 
after the Sacred War in which Cressa was destroyed, and the games 
instituted out of the spoils of the city, celebrated every third 
Olympic year. All these festivals helped to maintain the sense of 
the unity of the Greek race. SPARTA, under the Dorian rule, 
became a mere military encampment, as if in an enemy's country. 
LYCURGUS, 880 B.C., arranged for the lands to be cultivated by the 

1 Flint, " Philosophy of History," vol. i. p. 5. 



(52 Second Period. 

non-citizens and Helot population ; the freemen were as soldiers in 
barracks or tents. Two kings, a Senate of twenty-eight, and an 
Assembly of the free Spartans, constituted the government. The 
power and territory of Sparta was increased by the conquest of 
Messenia, after two wars, which lasted from 743 to 668 B.C., with a 
short interval. In most of the other Grecian communities, the 
dissensions and contentions for power among the people led to the 
necessity of choosing or accepting able individuals as temporary 
dictators (just as in Rome, and in all the revolutions in modern 
Europe, especially France) to frame a platform of constitutional 
government. In the history of ATHENS, for example, first, DRACO 
621 B.C., then SOLON 590 B.C., had been chosen for this purpose, to 
arbitrate between the exclusive claims of the great families, the aris- 
tocratic party, and the Demos i.e., the great body of the citizens, 
most of whom were poor. These conflicting interests had led to the 
usurpation of the supreme power in many cities by popular leaders 
raised . to irresponsible positions of authority by the poorer classes, 
who, being supported by a body of armed followers, became practically 
despotic. These were called Tyrants, not merely because their 
government might be strict and oppressive, but however it might be 
exercised. The Greeks respected the hereditary king of the heroic 
ages, but the elected demagogue ruler was their special aversion. 
" The noble who failed in the struggle with his brother aristocrats, 
this was he who taught the Demos their rights, and offered to lead 
them against their former oppressors." Thus there arose a certain 
phase of Greek " society, called the age of Tyrants, which has hardly 
received fair treatment at the hands of historians. Politically, it was 
an epoch of stagnation or retrogression ; but, socially and aesthetically, 
in spite of the vices of many Greek despots, I hold it to have been 
not only an age of progress in Greece, but even a necessary prelude 
to the higher life which was to follow .... the degradation of 
the lower classes, the undisguised violence of the nobles, made all 
approach to a proper constitution impossible .... the Tyrants 
systematically raised the common people and lowered the nobles 
.... they gave the cities a strong government and peace, giving 
the opportunity to develop commerce and to cultivate art. When 
the Tyrants passed away, Greece, by this fusion of classes produced 
by the Tyrants, was in fit condition to develop political life." l The 
complaints of the aristocratic poet Theognis, driven from Megara by 
a revolution, describes the consequences of a convulsion in which in 

1 Mahaffy, " Social Life in Greece," pp. 82-84. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire 559 B.C. 63 

Megara the ruling families had been supplanted by a Tyrant, such as 
was from time to time experienced by many other cities. " We see that 
the poet was connected with an oligarchy of birth and not of wealth, 
which had recently been subverted by the breaking in of the rustic 
populations, previously subject and degraded ; that these subjects 
were content to submit to a single-headed despot, in order to escape 
from their former rulers ; and that Theognis himself had been 
betrayed by his own friends and companions, stripped of his property, 
and exiled, through the wrong-doing of enemies, whose blood he 
hopes one day to be permitted to drink. The condition of the 
subject cultivators, previous to this revolution, he depicts in sad 
colours. They dwelt without the city, clad in goat-skins, and ignorant 
of judicial sanctions or laws ; after it, they had become citizens, and 
their importance had been immensely enhanced. Thus, according to 
his impression, the vile breed has trodden down the noble, the bad 
have become masters, and the good are no longer of any account." l 
The political meaning of the epithets good and bad differed from the 
ethical meaning : the good were the wealthy, the noble ; the bad, the 
low-born, the poor, the ignorant. In ATHENS, Pisistratus overturned 
the reformed oligarchy of Solon, and obtained the supreme power, 
and, though expelled thrice, retained his power until 527 B.C., when 
he died. His power was exercised under the old forms, and was 
supported by a band of Thracian mercenaries ; he maintained the 
laws of Solon, greatly improved the city, collected a library open to 
the public, and made, on the whole, a wise and noble use of his 
position. But the Athenians never regarded him as a successor of 
the Heroic kings. We must not forget that in Greece were made 
the first experiments in the construction and working of free govern- 
ment, which, however imperfect in their beginning, have served as 
lessons and guides to the civilised world, and have had no small 
influence on the progress of our race. Political science, the effort 
to enjoy a free life in a well-ordered state, dates its origin from the 
experiments of Greek statesmen and the thoughts of Greek philoso- 
phers." 3 The literature of Greece has, next to the Hebrew and 
Greek Scriptures, been the most valuable of influences in the educa- 
tion of the human race. 

6. Greek colonies were established along the ^Egean Sea in ASIA 
MINOR, on the shores of the Euxine, in ITALY and SICILY, in LIBYA 
(at Cyrene), soon after the Dorian conquest, 1104 B.C. Croton, in 



1 Grote, " History of Greece," I2mo. edition, vol. iii. pp. 44, 45. 

2 Quarterly Review, No. 148, p. 488. 



64 Second Period. 

south Italy, is connected with the endeavours of the great philoso- 
pher, Pythagoras, to establish a society for scientific study, for 
political improvement, and for the moral renovation of society, from 
550 to 510 B.C. The colonies in Asia Minor, and of the Propontis, 
and on the Euxine, and on the Palus Mseotis, were most important 
for the trade of civilised Asia, and for that of the barbarous nations 
north of the Euxine and the Caspian. The colonies to the west 
were established, long after, 750 to 650 B.C., in SOUTHERN Italy 
(called from them Magna Grsecia), and SICILY 600 B.C. ; most of 
them were begun by the leaders of parties in the ministry. Of these 
Sybaris has been famous for its luxurious habits, and has become a 
proverb. Those in SICILY were afterwards peculiarly important from 
their contest with the CARTHAGINIANS ; they formed the vanguard 
of Hellenic civilisation in Sicily especially opportunely established 
to check the ruthless policy of a Phoenician colony. A Greek 
colony was formed in LIBYA by Battus at Cyrene 640 B.C. ; Marseilles, 
in Gaul, was founded by the Phokaans 600 B.C. It will be seen 
from these colonies that the extent of Greek influence is not to be 
measured by the limits of Greek territory, properly called Greece or 
Hellas. At a very early period, so early as the sixth century B.C., 
the mind of west Asia and of half Italy was, to some extent, influenced 
by the Greek language, Greek literature, and Greek ideas on philo- 
sophy and polity. Greek colonisation, at one time, seemed likely to 
go far west. On the conquest of Lydia by Cyrus, " Bias of Briene, 
548 B.C., proposed that all the Ionian cities should follow the example 
of the Phokseans, and that there should be a general emigration to 
Sardinia, in order that all might obtain a new country there, and that 
there should be there found one great community, one city to be 
founded by all in common. Had this proposal been carried out, 
the achievements of Cyrus would have exercised a far deeper influence 
over the distant west than the mere settlement of the Phokseans in 
Atalia (Corsica). . . . The centre of Hellenic life would have been 
transplanted from east to west, and the fate of Italy would have been 
changed ; the Greeks would have retired before the supremacy of 
the East in order to establish a strong insular power among the weak 
communities of the West. But the lonians could not rise to the 
height of such a resolution." 1 " Herodotus bestows upon this plan 
the most unqualified commendation, and regrets that it was not acted 
upon. Had such been the case the subsequent history of Carthage, 
Sicily, and even Rome, might have been sensibly altered." 2 

1 Max-Duncker, vol. vi. p. 59. ' Grote, vol. iv. I2mo. p. 134. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire, 539 B.C. 65 

7. ITALY. In this period the Gauls occupied the north of Italy, 
the Ligurians, supposed to be an Iberian race, the shores of the 
Mediterranean extending from Etruria to south-east Gaul. Etruria, 
under the Etruscans, was a powerful state, gradually pressing south- 
ward upon the old Italic races, the Umbrians, Sikels, Oscans, 
Sabellians, &c. Southern Italy received a large number of Grecian 
settlements : Tarentum, Croton, Sybaris, Rhegium, Cuma, and others, 
between 1030 B.C. and 600 B.C. The Latin tribes were near neigh- 
bours to the aggressive Etruscans. Latium was supposed to have been 
the adopted country of ./Eneas when he fled from Troy, and Alba 
Longa was the seat of his reputed descendants for three centuries. 
This fable, flattering to Roman vanity, is now by all scholars regarded 
as a myth totally destitute of historical foundation. The plains of 
Latium were originally covered with villages, the centres of the various 
clans inhabiting the territory. These villages were sometimes inde- 
pendent, but more generally connected with some central point of 
union, the Civitas. Three tribes, the Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres, 
combined to form the population of Rome (753 B.C.). The Tiber was 
the natural highway for the traffic of Latium ; and Rome thus com- 
bined the advantages of a strong position, commanding both banks 
of the stream down to its mouth, afforded greater protection from 
pirates than could be found in towns situated immediately upon the 
sea-coast. To these commercial and strategical advantages Rome 
was indebted for its early importance as the emporium of Latium. 
It was governed by kings, of whom ROMULUS was the first ; and the 
regal power was checked by a senate and popular assembly. Tarquin 
the Proud, the last of the seven kings, was expelled 510 B.C. His- 
torians, patriots, and poets have fallen into the great delusion of 
regarding this event as the triumph of free principles of government 
and the extension of political liberty among the population of that 
city by the establishment of a republic. The real state of the case 
was far different. Whatever may have been the crimes of Tarquin 
the Proud, and of the Tarquinian regime, which was evidently of 
Etruscan origin, the change was in favour of an aristocracy, and of 
the limitation of the liberties of the old constitution of King Servius 
Tullius, while the power and territory of Rome were greatly diminished. 

But the early history of Rome is one of the battle-fields of 
modern archaeologists. By the school of Niebuhr, Mommsen, and 
others, followed by Ihne, Arnold, and Grote, the history of Rome, 
up to near the First Punic War, is regarded as mainly mythical and con- 
jectural. The learned critics have certainly made Out a fair case to 
justify a measure of incredulity in reference to the details, recorded 

F 



66 Second Period. 

by the regular historians, as Livy. But the attempt to reconstruct 
the history has been a failure. Dyer, in his history of the city of 
Rome, &c., has ably defended and all but proved the substantial 
truth of the leading facts connected with the regal history. Roman 
vanity has indeed falsified many particulars of the early history, and 
in the opinion of Dr. Arnold, the Roman historians, in point of 
accuracy and honesty, occupy a very inferior position compared with 
those of Greece. That Porsenna was conqueror in the war after the 
expulsion of the kings, and that Camillus did not overcome the 
Gauls, may be true, and the common tradition false j but that the 
leading facts of Roman progress and of the various constitutional 
changes are preserved in the old traditions cannot be doubted. The 
decried historians had access to documents now lost, and their mis- 
takes and exaggerations come nearer to the truth and explain the 
origines of Rome, on the whole, more satisfactorily than the ingenious 
speculations of modern critics. The population of Rome consisted 
originally of four classes : (i) the populus, the original founders of the 
city, called also the patricians ; these were divided into three tribes, 
each tribe having ten curice: each curia, being a religious corporation, 
distinguished by its peculiar sacred rites and objects of worship, was 
divided into an indefinite number of gentes or clans ; a gens con- 
sisting at first of parties tracing their descent (either naturally or by 
adoption) from one common ancestor and having one family name ; 
(2) the clients, consisting of the dependants -of the patricians, not 
without political rights, but identified with the interests of their 
patrons; (3) the plebs or plebeians, consisting mainly of the popula- 
tion of towns conquered by the Romans, or of voluntary emigrants : 
these were free, and often wealthy from their industrial and com- 
mercial pursuits, but had no political power, and could not inter- 
marry with patrician families ; (4) the slaves. The government was 
first under the direction of an elective king, but after 510 B.C., in two 
consuls, elected by the senate and people annually. The senate at 
first consisted of three hundred members from the patrician families, 
almost absolute in its authority, but checked by the comitia curiata, 
composed entirely of the patrician class, in which the majority of 
each curia directed the vote of that curia, and so through the thirty 
curia the senate had the entire executive power at first, but this was 
lessened by the successive additional power claimed and exercised by 
the centuriates and tributes. The plebeians were first admitted to a 
share in the government by the legislation attributed to Servius 
Tullms, by which the plebs were divided into six classes proportional 
to their wealth and the taxation paid by them. The first class 



From 1000 B.C. to tJie Persian Empire, 539 B.C. 67 

embraced the equestrian order (the knights), who formed the cavalry 
and were possessed of property to the amount- of ^"320 and had 
ninety-eight votes ! In the comitia centuriata the other classes were 
reckoned at ninety-five centuries and had ninety-five votes. Thus 
the political power and at the same time the public burdens of the 
state fell to the wealthier classes. Another assembly was the comitia 
tributa. This was purely a plebeian assembly, as it had reference to 
the thirty tribes into which the plebs had been divided, and in 
which the votes were taken by tribes without reference to wealth or 
rank ; but this assembly possessed little importance until after the 
expulsion of the kings. On the respective rights and powers of the 
comitias (curiata, centuriata, and tributa] there is considerable 
difference of opinion among scholars ; the comitia curiata, however, 
became a mere form when in 337 B.C. Publius, by the second Publian 
Law, compelled the senate to permit any law to be discussed in the 
comitia tributa, and, as a matter of course, to be recognised by 
the senate. The history of the struggle for two hundred years for 
popular rights is on the whole highly creditable to the Roman 
people, on the one hand, for only asking for what was reasonable; and 
to the senate, on the other hand, for knowing how to yield. In the 
popular interest, the fact that the meetings of the comitia tributa did 
not require the religious sanction of the patrician priestly officials 
was a great 'ad vantage, for the comitia centuriata could at any time 
be dissolved, when it suited the patricians to declare the omens 
unfavourable. 

8. CARTHAGE was a Tyrian city, established for commerce; it 
was at first a city merely, not a nation, though in after-times 
exercising imperial power over conquered or allied nations, besides 
the neighbouring territory occupied by the wealthy citizens in 
villas and gardens, and by a numerous agricultural population. Its 
government, like that of all Phoenician cities, was monopolised by 
the great families who formed an hereditary aristocracy, modified at 
a later period by a small amount of democratic influence. The fleet 
of Carthage was the main support of its power. An army formed of 
mercenaries, enlisted from the population of North Africa, Liguria, 
Gaul, and Spain, was fully employed in securing its possessions 
in Spain, and afterwards in wars for the extension of their frontier. 
The colonies made by Carthage were practically mere factories for 
trade, or military positions, and none of them ever attained to the 
importance of the Greek colonies, as, for example, Agrigentum and Syra- 
cuse. HANNO, in his fleet, explored Western Africa as far as Guinea, 
580 B.C. So early as 550 B.C. the Carthaginians had fought with 

F 2 



68 Second Period. 

the Phokaan fleets, and had begun to take up positions in Sardinia. 
The interests of their commerce led to a treaty with Rome, 508 B.C., 
for its regulation on the coast of Italy and to prevent communication 
with Africa. The Carthaginians agreed to make no trading settle- 
ments on the shores of Latium and Campania, while the Romans 
agreed not to sail on the African coast to the south of the Hermaean 
Promontory (the north-east point of Africa). Hatred to the Greeks 
as commercial rivals, and as opponents in the struggle for the 
possession of Sicily, was one characteristic of their foreign policy : 
they were anxious to join with the Persians in the attempt to over- 
whelm the national existence and civilisation of Greece. 

9. INDIA before 500 B.C. The Aryans\&& spread as far as Bengal. 
The code of Manu, supposed to be of a very remote antiquity by 
Sir W. Jones, who dates it from 1820 B.C., is now by the critics 
brought down to the fifth and sixth century B.C.; and even so recent 
as the fourth century B.C. This may be true as to the code in its 
present stage, but it is obviously compiled from old laws of very 
remote antiquity. In the mythological poetical histories of India, 
the "Puranas" record a war between the solar dynasty of Oude, 
supported by Brahma, with the lunar dynasty. The Maha-Barata, 
is a legend of the family feuds in the lunar dynasty. These events are 

supposed to relate to events from 1400 B.C. to 1000 B.C. The real 
history of the Indian kingdom is very uncertain until the Mahom- 
medan invasion. The most remarkable revolution is. the rise and 
predominance of BUDDHISM for a period of four hundred or five 
hundred years. This was a reaction against the power and rule of 
BRAHMINISM, which is thought to have commenced long before the 
time of Buddha (called also Gotama and Sakya Muni) who was born 
625 B.C., and died 543 B.C. 

CHINA, at so early a period as 936 B.C., began to suffer from the 
incursions of the Tartar tribes on its northern frontier. Muh-Wang, 
of the Chow Dynasty, then reigned, and the empire was disturbed by 
the wars of the sub-kingdoms. In the sixth century the two great 
philosophers Lao-tsze and Confucius flourished. 

10. Religious History. INDIA (Northern) : The Aryan races had 
already passed from the simple partial civilisation and nature- 
worship of their ancestry into the Brahminical rule, the dominion of 
caste. The four principal, the Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (soldiers), 
Vaisiyas (merchants), and Sudras (cultivators), are subdivided into 
many distinct classes, and outside the castes are the degraded Pariahs. 
The doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and the final rest of the 
purified by the absorption of the soul in the Nirwana, is common to 



From IOOQ B.C. to the Persian Empire, 539 B.C. 69 

Brahminism and its rival system Buddhism. This great reaction 
against the exclusive Brahminism is supposed to have commenced 
before the birth of Buddha. He is said to have ignored the existence 
of the Deity, and to have denied the efficacy of prayer, and to have 
resolutely broken the bondage of caste. His moral code approaches 
very near to that of Christianity, enforcing goodness and kindness as 
the only merits by which the soul could rise in its transmigration. 
The five deadly sins were murder, theft, adultery, drunkenness, and 
falsehood. Buddhism has recently been the subject of much literary 
controversy, A. Lillie, in his popular "Life of Buddha" (1880), 
and Mr. E. Arnold, in his poem, "The light of Asia," stoutly oppos- 
ing the atheism attributed to the system by the article in the 
" Enclyclopaedia Britannica," ninth edition, and by Rhys Davids in 
the " Hibbert Lectures." The early accounts of Buddha which exist 
among the southern Buddhists are comparatively free from the fables 
in the writings of the northern Buddhists. These latter attribute to 
Buddha a birth, life, and miracles similar to those of our Saviour, 
obviously copied from the apocryphal Gospels, or from the genuine 
Gospels introduced into India about 300 A.D. Some of the learned, 
ignorant of the disparity between the genuine and the fictitious 
histories of Buddha, and relying upon the veracity of the northern 
fables, inferred that the character of the Christ of the Gospels had 
originated in the myths respecting Buddha which might have reached 
Palestine. But there is not the slightest trace of any such historical 
connexions between Buddhism and Christian literature, or of any 
such traditions current in Asia either before or immediately after the 
Christian era. The legends in question do not appear in northern 
India until the fourth century after Christ. 1 The Jains, a sect which 
is contemporary with Buddha, are equally opposed to Brahminism, 
especially in regard to the transmigration of souls after death. 
In IRAN (Eastern Persia) the teachings of the Zend-Avesta, ascribed to 
Zoroaster, were fully received. This dualistic system survives among 
the Parsees of India to this day. The Magi were the priests. Fire was 
the grand symbol highly revered. Originally there were no temples, 
altars, or statues, and the sacrifices were offered on the tops of the 
hills. In CHINA the common-sense secular philosophy of Confucius 
(550 B.C.) has helped to form and stereotype the Chinese character. 
He did not interfere with the old national ancestor worship, but 



1 See British and Foreign Evangelical Review^ vol. xxxi. 729 ; the Nineteenth 
Century i December, 1880; Rev. Spence Hardy, "Legends of the Buddhists," 
"Eastern Monachism." 



70 Second Period. 

confined himself to purely ethical teaching. A much more pro- 
found though less popular philosophy or religion was taught by 
Lao-tsze, the contemporary of Confucius. It is called Tansm, and its 
Bible is the "Tao-Teh-King," "a genuine relic of one of the most 
original minds of the Chinese race." * Under the name of Too, the 
reference is to God as the way to heaven. God is considered as the 
author of nature, and as the great exemplar to men and to govern- 
ments. The present system of Taoism is a corruption of the original 
teaching, in which Lao-tsze is deified. 

1 1. LITERATURE in this period was mainly confined to the Hebrews 
and the Greeks. The writings of the Phoenicians, the Carthaginians, 
and even of the Egyptians, have perished, leaving mere fragments. 
The Assyrian and Babylonian literature exists only on brick tablets, 
of which but a small part have been excavated, and fewer still 
translated, so as to be accessible. The literature of the Phoenicians, 
and of their colonists, the Carthaginians, is lost. What would we 
give for the narrative of the voyage of the Phoenician ships which, 
sailing from the Red Sea, circumnavigated Africa by command of 
Paraoh Necho, 611-609 B.C., or for that of Hanno, the Carthaginian, 
who, about 580 B.C., sailed along the western coast of Africa as far 
Guinea? 

The HEBREWS had the writings of the Prophets, the successors of 
Samuel, who wrote the historical books of Ruth, Samuel, Kings, and 
Chronicles, the last two after the Captivity. These are compilations 
from contemporary writers to which there is frequent reference. The 
Psalms are attributed to DAVID and others of the Hebrew worthies, 
some of them as early as Moses, and others after the Captivity : the 
Songs, the Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes to SOLOMON chiefly, though with 
subsequent additions. The prophetical writings begin with Jonah, 
825 B.C. (Jonah is a vindication of Jehovah's love even for the 
heathen, and a sharp reproof of Jewish narrow exclusiveness) ; Joel, 
Hosea, and Amos, 810-750 B.C. ; Isaiah, 758-698 B.C. ; Micah, 
756-697 B.C. ; Nahum, 720 B.C. ; Habakkuk and Zephaniah, 
630-629 B.C.; Obadiah, 588-583 B.C.; Jeremiah, 629-586 B.C.; 
Daniel, whose life was spent in Babylon, 606-534 B.C. ; Ezekiel, 
595~5 68 B -c. These last three were the prophets of the Captivity. The 
date of Zechariah is a controverted point, but Haggai and Malachi, 
the last of the prophets, lived between the return from the Captivity, 
534 B.C., to about 400 B.C. Ezra and Nehemiah, to whom the books 
so called are ascribed, were the contemporaries of these later 

1 British Quarterly, No. 155, pp. 74-107. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire -, 539 B.C. 71 

prophets. No writer of a later date has been admitted into the 
" Canon " by the Jewish authorities. The prophetical writings are 
singular, occupying a position claimed by no other literature. They 
express to us the decisions and will of the Supreme Ruler of the 
universe on points bearing upon the great question of the principles 
of the divine moral government over nations and individuals, 
reminding us that, while " clouds and darkness " may hide from us 
right views respecting the divine administration, yet " righteousness 
and judgment are the habitation of His throne " (Psalm xcvii. 2). 
They also present to us most encouraging views of the future con- 
dition of the human race, when the Christian dispensation shall have 
been fully realised on earth. 

The GREEKS had poets before Homer, as Orpheus, Linus, Musceus, 
and Jalemus. Homer, the greatest of all EPIC POETS, may have 
lived 800 B.C. His subject was the war of Troy and the return of 
Ulysses to Ithaca. Hesiod some time later. These poets are specially 
identified with the polytheism of the Greeks. Hesiod records the 
cosmogony received in his age. By individualising the powers of 
nature, and forming genealogies of these fictitious impersonations of 
natural phenomena, he tempted the unbelief of men like Thales to 
introduce " the conception of substances, with their transformations 
and sequences, in place of that string of persons and quasi-human 
attributes which had animated the old legendary world." 1 The 
LYRIC POETS were Archilochus, 700 B.C., Kallinus, Tyrtaeus, Alkman, 
Alkaeus, Sappho, from 670 to 610 B.C. ; Simonides, 540 B.C., 
Anacreon, 650 B.C., Pindar, 520 B.C., Ibykus, 540 B.C., .^Esop, 
560 B.C., &c. The earliest prose writers Cadmus of Miletus, 
540 B.C., Akusilaus of Argos, 550 B.C., Pherekydes of Syros, 560 B.C. 
Of the philosophical writers this Pherekydes and Anaximander were 
the first who committed their views on philosophy to writing. Grecian 
philosophy began with the famous constellation of the seven wise 
men of Greece Solon the Athenian, Thales the Milesian, Pittakus 
the Mitylenean, Bias the Prienian, My son of Chenae, Cheilon the 
Spartan, Periander of Corinth "the first persons whoever acquired 
an Hellenic reputation grounded on mental competency, apart from 
poetical genius or effect ; a proof that political and social prudence 
was beginning to be appreciated and admired on its own account." 3 
These men were " persons of practical discernment in reference to 
man and society," in whose homely sayings or admonitions we 
have the earliest manifestations of social philosophy, long preceding 

1 Grote, vol. iv. p. 515. 2 Ibid., p. 128. 



7 2 Second Period. 

" the growth of dialectics and discussion." The first philosophers were 
scientific investigators, setting aside the legendary and polytheistic 
conceptions of nature taught in the Theogony of Hesiod. " They 
endeavoured to treat the visible world as a whole, and inquire when 
and how it began, as well as into all its changes .... All these 
were topics admitting of being conceived in many different ways 
.... but not reducible to any solution, either resting on scientific 
evidence or commending steady adherence under a free scrutiny." ] 
This impossibility of a satisfactory solution of these questions led 
many to despair in the search after truth; "hence the vein of 
scepticism which runs through the Greek philosophy." Oriental 
science, such as it was, received through PHOENICIA or from the 
KHITA, to Ionia, probably originated the philosophical movement in 
Greece. THALES of Miletus, 640 B.C. (claiming a descent from Kadmus 
the Phoenician), was founder of the Ionic School of Philosophy, which 
aimed at discovering the one principle or substance from which all 
things could be deduced. Thales thought that this primary sub- 
stance was water (moisture). That he was acquainted with the 
astronomical learning of the East is probable, as he is reported to 
have foretold an eclipse of the sun (which took place September 30, 
610 B.C., or May 28, 585 B.C.). Anaximander of Miletus, 
610-550 B.C., supposed a primeval infinite principle including all 
qualities potentially, whose essence it was to be eternally pro- 
ductive of different phenomena. The earth was evolved from a fluid 
state, and men first lived in the water like fishes. He is said 
to have made the first sun-dial and the first geographical map. 
Anaximenes (548-500 B.C.) of Miletus, generally agreed with 
Anaximander, but regarded the air as the first principle. He 
discovered the obliquity of the ecliptic by means of the 
gnomon. Heraclitus of Ephesus (500 B.C.), the weeping philosopher, 
regarded fire as the elemental principle, the divine spirit of nature. 
" He was the first to proclaim the absolute vitality of nature, the 
endless change of matter, the mutability and perceptibility of all 
individual things in contrast with the Eternal Being, the supreme 
harmony which rules over all." 2 Contemporary with the Ionic school 
was the singular and isolated Pythagoras of Samos (580-520 B.C.), 
the foundation of whose teaching was that numbers are the cause of 
the material existence of things, the ultimate nature of things as 
explained by Lewes. 3 Thus each individual thing may change all 
its peculiar attributes except its numerical ones, it is always one 

1 Grote, vol. iii. p. 518. 

* Lewes, "History of Philosophy," p. 61. 3 Ibid>> pp> 2 ^ 2 ^ 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire, 539 B.C. 73 

thing. So also the Infinite must be one. In the original one all 
numbers are contained, and consequently the elements of the whole 
world. In the opinion of Von Ranke, " the doctrine was based 
upon a perception of the invariable mathematical laws which govern 
the motions of the heavenly bodies. In these motions numerical 
relations appeared of such importance that the philosopher, con- 
fusing form with substance, fancied he recognised in number a 
divine creative force which ruled all things from the beginning." 1 
He taught at Crotona, in opposition to the public religion, a 
secret religion, which Von Ranke thinks successfully opposed the 
Phoenician superstitions then issuing from Carthage to overflow the 
Western world. The theory of the metempsychosis, borrowed from 
the Egyptians, was combined with the doctrine of moral retribution, 
in which the soul an emanation from the central fire, the principle 
of heat, was destined to pass successively through several bodies. 
The stars are regarded as divinities, the daemons as a race between 
the gods and men. 2 In the political revolutions of Crotona Pytha- 
goras and his followers founded a secret society, which was destroyed 
500 B.C. "The infinite of Anaximander became the one of Pytha- 
goras. Observe, that in neither of these systems is mind an attribute 
of the infinite." 3 The Eleatic School of Philosophy was formed by 
Xenophanes of Kolophon 570-480 B.C., who settled in the Phokean 
colony of Elea, and there openly derided the popular theology, taught 
that all things that exist are eternal and immutable. God is the most 
perfect essence, but cannot be represented ; He is all hearing, all 
thought, all sight, the one is God (pantheistically), one existence under 
many moods; he was opposed to the poets, preferring "problems 
to pictures." 4 Parmenides of Elea, 460 B.C., taught that the under- 
standing alone is capable of contemplating truth ; the senses could 
only afford deceptive appearances ; pure existence is thought and 
knowledge ; all existences are one and identical. 5 Being alone 
exists, there is no becoming. The tendency here is clearly towards 
scepticism. 6 To the same effect, Melisstis of Samos (444 B.C.). All 
that we learn from our senses is simply appearances ; also Zeno of 
Elea, 460 B.C., who opposed reason to mere experience, and laid the 
foundation of a system of logic. With "Zeno closes the second 
great line of independent inquiry which, opened by Anaximander^ 
and continued by Pythagoras, Xenophanes, and Parmenides, we may 

1 Ranke, "Universal History," p. 286. 2 Tennemann, pp. 66, 67. 

3 Lewe?, "History of Philosophy," p. 30. 4 Lewes, p. 41. 

5 Tennemann, vol. i. p. 73. 6 Lewes, p. 48. 



Second Period. 

characterise as the mathematical or absolute system. Its opposition 
to the Ionic, physical or empirical systems was radical and constant 
The two systems clashed together on the arrival of Zeno at 
Athens the result of the conflict was the creation of a new method 
-dialectics. This method created the sophists and the sceptics* The 
atomic schools founded ^ Leucippus (Abdera or Miletus 500 B c.), 
who advocated the existence of matter filling all space, composed of 
atoms, different in form but invariable, indivisible, and imperceptible. 
By these all things emit heat, motion, and thought, even the soul 
itself. Democritus of Abdera 500-450 B.C., the laughing philosopher, 
agreed with Leucippus, cultivated science, and first guessed that the 
Milky Way is composed of millions of stars. He regarded sensation 
as arising from images emanating from external objects hence 
thought. Then followed others unclassified as to school. Diogenes 
of Apollonia, 472-460 B.C., blended the teachings oiAnaximenes and 
Anaxagoras, air i.e., the soul, thought was the fundamental prin- 
ciple. Archelaus of Miletus, about 450 B.C., a disciple of Anaxagoras, 
taught that all things came out of chaos by fire and water; 
mankind had gradually risen from the common herd of animals ; 
our ideas of just and right are merely conventional. Anaxagoras ', 
of Clazomense, a friend of Pericles, 500-428 B.C., taught that an 
omnipotent, world-ordering mind was the origin of all things. This 
mind was God, not the creator but the indwelling ruler, the soul of 
the universe, not a moral intelligence, simply zprimum mobile. He 
was the first who reached the idea of a divine formative intellect. 
As a scientific man, he saw in the sun, and moon, worlds like our own. 
Empedocles of Agrigentum, 490-440 B.C., of a noble family, rejected 
all the gods and their worship. His philosophy agreed partly with 
Xenophanes, Heraclitus, and Anaxagoras. In the case of Em- 
pedocles, it is all but impossible to define the peculiarity of his 
teaching. It is said that he began to fancy himself to be something of 
a divine person, and that he threw himself into the crater of Mount 
Etna in order to conceal the fact of his mortality. Von Ranke 
remarks : " This triad of ancient seats of philosophy Crotona, Elea, 
and Agrigentum is very remarkable. In the Graeco-Sicilian colonies 
those ideas were developed which owed their origin to the contrast 
of Greek and Eastern minds in Ionia. They form the foundation 
of all the philosophy of the human race." 2 

1 Lewes, " History of Philosophy," pp. 53, 54. 

2 Ranke, " Universal History," p. 288. 



From 1000 B.C. to the Persian Empire , 539 B.C. 75 



The State of the World 539 B.C. 

EUROPE. 

SPAIN, occupied by Iberian (Berber) and Keltic races. One of 
these races, the Turdetani, in the south, had made consider- 
able advances in civilisation, perhaps through their intercourse 
with Phoenician and Carthaginian traders, by whom settle- 
ments had been made on the southern and eastern coasts ; 
also a Greek colony at Saguntum probably in the sixth 
century B.C. 

GAUL. Keltic races in the north and centre. Iberian races in the 
south. Massilia (now Marseilles), founded by the Phokeans 
about 600 B.C. The Greeks, having so early as 1000 B.C. 
begun to rival the Phoenicians and to take from them the 
trade of the Eastern Mediterranean, now began to compete 
with them in the West. In Britain Kelts, and perhaps a 
few Teutonic tribes in the East. 

SCANDINAVIA. Finnish and Tschudic (Turanian) tribes sparsely 
scattered. The Goths, a Teutonic race, enter Sweden from 
Germany. 

GERMANY. The Keltic tribes, gradually driven westward or absorbed 
by the Teutonic races. To the east of Germany, the vast 
plains now known as Poland and Russia were occupied by 
Sclavonic races, who either absorbed or destroyed their 
Turanian predecessors. On the shores of the Black Sea and 
of the Sea of Azoph, Greek colonies, chiefly from Miletus, 
had been planted so early as the eighth and tenth centuries 
B.C. These colonies extended their trade over the whole of 
what is now Russia and Poland, and eastward beyond the 
Caspian Sea. 

ITALY. Keltic tribes in the north. Iberian Ligurians on the coast 
from Gaul to the borders of the Etruscans. The Rasena 
(Etruscans) in Tuscany. Greek colonies in southern Italy, 
most of them established between 750 and 650 B.C. The 
Umbrians, Oscans, Sabellians, Samnites, Latins, and other 
powerful tribes occupied Central Italy. The Romans, of 
Latin origin, occupied a strong and commanding position 



76 Second Period. 

under their kings. Sicily, originally settled by the Sicani 
(Iberians), and by the Siculi (an Italic race), had also 
Etruscan colonies, and then the far more important Greek 
settlements at Naxos, Syracuse, Agrigentum, and the 
Phoenician or Carthaginian settlements at Panormus, Solseis, 
and Motye (735 B.C.). Sicily was to the Phoenicians what 
Egypt is to England, the half-way house to valuable pos- 
sessions; Spain was to the Phoenicians what India is to 
England; hence, in after-years, the Carthaginian efforts to 
drive the Greek colonists from Sicily. Phalaris, the Greek 
tyrant of Agrigentum, 565 B.C., is remembered mainly by 
certain letters attributed to him, which called forth the 
famous controversy of Bentley against Boyle in the eighteenth 
century in England. 

GREECE, and the Islands, under a number of petty republics of 
which Athens and Sparta were the chief. Two petty king- 
doms, Macedonia and Epirus, far behind the rest of Greece 
in civilisation ; the Greek colonies in Asia Minor first subject 
to Lydia, and then to Persia. 



ASIA. 

CHINA, under the Chow dynasty, which ruled over several subor- 
dinate kingdoms. 

INDIA. The Aryan races in the north. The beginning of the 
Buddhist reaction against Brahminism. 

THE EMPIRE of the Medes and Persians extended from the ^Egean 
to the Indus, and as far north as Bactria, but within these 
boundaries were a large number of self-governed kingdoms 
and satrapies, which were only nominally subject to the 
"great king." Of the regions of Central and Northern Asia 
beyond the Caspian and the Himalaya Mountains we know 
nothing, except from occasional inroads of the Kimmerians 
and Scythians upon Asia Minor and Media. A Median 
king, 607 B.C., built a wall ninety miles long and 120 feet 
high, between the Caucasus and the Caspian, as a barrier 
against them. 

JAPAN, originally settled from the continent. The first Mikado 
began to reign in the seventh century B.C. 



State of the World 539 B.C. 77 



AFRICA. 

EGYPT, much exhausted by the Babylonian ravages, but as yet under 
its own king. 

ETHIOPIA, long subject to Egypt, In the eighth century B.C., 
Napata (the seat of a great sanctuary devoted to the worship 
of Amun in the sixteenth century B.C.) became the capital 
of the kingdom of Meroe, under a branch of the Her-hor 
dynasty of Thebes. The rulers were the princes of Noph 
(Isaiah xix. 13 ; Ezekiel xxx. 13), who for a season governed 
Egypt from 750-650 B.C., contending with the Assyrians for 
the rule over that country. 

THE BERBERS, the ancient Libyans (Lehabim, Gen. x. 13, 14), from 
whom the Kabyles, Tuarechs (Tauricks) are descended, 
occupied Northern Africa. A Greek colony had been settled 
at Cyrene, 631 B.C., by the island of Thera. Barca was an 
offshoot of Cyrene, founded about 550 B.C. 

THE CARTHAGINIANS dominated over all North Africa (westward of 
Libya). 



THIRD PERIOD, 



From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 
539 B.C. to the Empire of Alexander 
the Great, 330 B.C. 



i. THE main event of these 200 years is the resistance of the 
rising, vigorous civilisation of the West, as represented by Greece, to 
the less vigorous civilisation of the East, of which Persia was a 
favourable specimen. The final triumph of the Greeks was the 
conquest of Persia by Alexander, through which the Macedonian 
Greeks spread the ideas and the language of Greece into Egypt and 
the far East, even into India. Meanwhile the Phoenician Cartha- 
ginians in North Africa, the Romans in Italy, each of them gradu- 
ally advancing and consolidating their power, were preparing to 
contend for the sovereignty of the Western world. 

The PERSIAN EMPIRE has not generally been regarded as meriting 
much notice from historians. Max-Duncker is the first of modern 
historians who has done justice to the character of the Persian 
Government: "The Persian empire is commonly spoken of as 
extending from the ^gean to the Indus ; but in this vast extent of 
territory are included kingdoms under their native kings, vast 
governments under satraps, only nominally dependent upon the 
Great King, acknowledging his authority simply by payment of 
tribute. They were so far independent as to engage in war with 
each other, and to hire Greek and other mercenary troops in self- 
defence. The large territories in Turkey, in Asia, and Persia were 
not so 'far reduced to deserts as they are now, but were inhabited by 
Turcoman or Arab tribes, who then, as in our day, paid tribute when 
the ruling power was able to enforce it. The empire of Cyrus was 



From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, &c. 79 

far more compact than the preceding empires of Babylon and 
Assyria, or the present Governments in Asiatic Turkey and Persia. 
A thorough revolution had been accomplished by Cyrus. The pre- 
dominance of Shemitic culture and arms had passed away into the 
hands of the Aryans of Iran. From the mountains of his native 
land Cyrus had subjugated in thirty years three great empires, Media, 
Lydia, and Babylonia. None of the conquerors before him had 
achieved results which could be compared with his. He understood 
how to maintain his conquests ; he was not compelled, like the 
rulers of Assyria, to begin each year a new struggle against his 
defeated opponents ; he knew how to institute arrangements which 
secured an existence of two centuries. The kingdom rested on the 
rule and devotion of the Persians ; they were the ruling tribe ; free 
from contributions and taxes, they had only to render military service. 
The Medes of the same race and religion [Iranians and Zends] were 
closely identified with the Persians. Pliny states that the conquest 
of Asia yielded to Cyrus 24,000 pounds of gold besides gold and 
silver plate. Alexander found in Persia 180,000 talents, equal to 
forty millions sterling. Under Darius Hystaspes the tax on cul- 
tivated land produced 7,600 talents of silver, equal to 2-J millions 
sterling, and from Indian tribute equal to three millions sterling, the 
entire revenue being perhaps fourteen millions sterling. Cyrus was the 
least bloody among the conquerors and founders of empires in the 
East. He took the place of a native king to the conquered people. 
Among all the native rulers of the East no one is like him, and one 
only approached him Darius Hystaspes." 1 It is supposed, from the 
evidence of the inscriptions, that Cyrus was an Elamite, of the royal 
Persian clan of Teispes, who took possession of Elam on the fall 
of the Assyrian empire. See Ezra i. 2 ; Isaiah xxi. 2, where the 
original Elam is rendered by the more familiar word Persia? 

2. Cyrus, , the founder of the Persian empire, was the object of 
admiration to both Jewish and Greek writers. He was evidently a 
man intellectually and morally above his countrymen. As a Theist 
of the old Iranian faith he was opposed to Polytheism, but in 
political action patronising where he found it established. The sup- 
position to the contrary, advanced by Sayce, 3 is founded on the fact 
of Cyrus's patronage of the popular gods of the conquered nations, 
which does not affect his personal belief in his own Zoroastrian creed. 
The kings of Persia were of the Achsemenian family of the royal tribe 

1 Vol. vi. pp. 92-387, abridged. 

2 "Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments," p. 180. 3 Ibid., pp. 168-175. 



So From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C. 

of the Pasargadze. The seats of empire were at Susa, Persepolis, and at 
Ecbatana, the old capital of the Medes. Both these central positions, by 
the institution of regular posts carried by horsemen, were connected 
with the distant points of this vast empire. The title of " the great 
king " was given to the sovereign of Persia by the Greeks as well as 
by the Asiatics. A large amount of wealth taken from Sardis and 
Babylon, valued at one hundred and twenty-six millions sterling, met 
the expenses of the state until the reign of Darius Hystaspes. The 
old Median religion, as reformed by Zoroaster, was the religion of the 
state ; the emblem of Deity was fire ; the Magi were a caste specially 
devoted to astrology, astronomy, and ritualistic forms. Cyrus had 
probably been prepossessed in favour of the Jewish exiles in Babylon 
by their monotheism, and by what he had heard and seen of the 
prophet Daniel, and by the designation of himself by his titular 
name as the conqueror of Babylon by the prophet Isaiah (chap. xlv.). 
He at once permitted the restoration of the Jews to their own land 
5266.0. In a just and necessary war, defending the north-eastern 
provinces of his empire from the old enemies of southern Asia, the 
nomad Scythian tribes, he was killed in battle 529 B.C. Cambyses, 
his son, succeeded ; he put to death his brother Bardia, to whom 
Cyrus had left the remote East, Bactria ; then he conquered 
Egypt, which had revolted. The cruelty attributed to him is very 
doubtful. He desired to subjugate Carthage, but the Phoenicians 
refused to assist with their fleet. One of the Magi took the name 
and claims of the 'dead Bardia, and usurped the throne of Persia 
while Cambyses was yet alive, 522 B.C. After Cambyses' death he 
was for a while acknowledged, but within six months the deception 
was discovered, and he was slain by Darius Hystaspes, of the family 
of Cyrus, 522 B.C. A civil war, with the revolt of the Medes, was 
not finished for five years 517 B.C. Darius soon after is said to have 
crossed the Bosphorus, and marched across the Danube, along the 
shores of the Euxine with a large army, but the Scythians retreated 
before him and he had to retrace his steps. His object was, pro- 
bably, to get the settlements of the Greeks on the northern Euxine 
under his power. He had by his officers placed Thrace and the 
Greek Chersonesus under his power 513 B.C. ; then followed the re- 
conquest of Egypt and the conquest of Barca, the Greek colony 
(Cyrene) 512. A fleet was sent to explore the west of Europe, which 
advanced as far as Crotona in Italy, the real design of which was to 
ascertain the position of the Greeks. It is well to call to mind the 
extent of the empire, for the Strymon, which separates Thrace from 
Macedonia, was 3,000 miles to the Indus, from Memphis to Sogdia 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 81 

2,500 miles, from the ^Egean Sea to Susa 1,755 miles. The post was 
carried from Ephesus to Susa in five or six days. Travellers with 
baggage could reach Susa in ninety days. Aryan life- and culture 
were now dominant through the whole breadth of Asia. The 
Behistan inscription which DARIUS placed in an inaccessible position 
on the famous rock on the route from Babylon to Ecbatana yet 
remains in the three tongues (Aryan, Turanian, and Shemitic), to 
testify to the fame of Darius. The world had never seen such an 
empire. Beyond the ^Egean Sea a branch of the Aryan stock, the 
Hellenes, had developed an independent civilisation and city life in 
small mountain cantons, in a peninsula all but surrounded by the 
sea. " The eye of the potentate of Asia looked, no doubt, with 
contempt on these unimportant communities, whose colonies in Asia 
and Africa had long been subject to him, on states of which each 

could put in the field no more than a few thousand warriors 

Was it possible that these small cantons, without political union or 
common interests, living in perpetual strife and feud .... was it 
possible that these cantons could maintain their independence 
against Persia? .... It was a question of decisive importance for 
the civilisation and development of humanity, whether the new prin- 
ciple of communal government which had been carried out in the 
Hellenic cantons should be maintained, or pass into the vast limits 
of the Persian empire, and succumb to the authority of the king 
state-power, and even life : absolute authority and the will of the 
majority, abject obedience and conscious self-control the masses 
and the individual these were ranged opposite each other, and the 
balance was already turning in favour of overwhelming material 
force." 1 

Aristagoras, Tyrant of Miletus, " morally contemptible, but gifted 
intellectually with a range of ideas of unlimited extent, made for 
himself an imperishable name by being the first to entertain the 
thought of a collective opposition to the Persians on the part of all 
the Greeks, even contemplating the possibility of waging a great and 
successful war upon them." 2 

The contest was hastened by the revolt of the Greek colonies 
in the ^Egean, in which the Athenians had assisted the revolters, 
500-494 B.C. Darius was deeply offended, and sent out Datis and 
Artaphernes, 492-490 B.C., to occupy Greece. All the islands and 
most of the states in the mainland submitted, and sent the tokens 

1 Max-Duncker, vol. vi. pp. 406-408. 

2 Von Ranke, "Universal History," p. 161. 

G 



82 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

of their submission, " earth and water," to the Persian camp. The 
Athenians began the resistance, and defeated the Persian generals 
at Marathon by an army of ten thousand, commanded by Miltiades. 
Darius died 490 B.C. in the midst of his preparation for a second 
invasion. Xerxes succeeded, and prepared an army said to consist of 
1,700,000 men and 1,207 Phoenician ships, 482-481 B.C.; the army 
passed through Asia Minor, and Xerxes crossed the Hellespont, 
and began the greatest and most unfortunate of all the expeditions 
which have crossed that strait to invade Europe. 

3. GREECE had hitherto been without any bond of political union. 
Each state viewed its neighbour as a rival, and each state was, as in 
all freely-governed communities, divided by the contentions of two 
parties, the aristocratic and democratic. " The full and perfect sove- 
reignty of each separate city formed the political ideal of the Greek 
mind ; the less advanced members of the Hellenic race did not fully 
attain to the conception because they did not fully attain to the per- 
fection of Greek city life In the earliest times this system 

of small separate communities formed the whole political world of 
which the Greeks had any knowledge." 1 Sparta was essentially 
military and aristocratic, was in all her policy opposed to democracy, 
and established oligarchies where it had the power ; it was reconciled 
to the subjugation of the Greek colonies in Asia by Persia, and never 
punished or redressed the arbitrary deeds of its commanders. 
Athens, on the contrary, having expelled the last of the sons of 
Pisistratus (Hippias) 510 B.C., was, from the restored constitution 
of Solon (liberalised by Cleisthenes), essentially democratic. All 
power was invested in the whole body of free citizens (the Demos), 
practically not exceeding from five to six thousand male adults, and 
representing a population of twenty to thirty thousand of the citizen 
population. Meetings were held every eight days in the open air, 
by which the magistrates and generals were chosen, and legal points 
decided. Such an assembly was a mere mob, but, on the whole, an 
intelligent mob, though too [easily influenced by orators, and occa- 
sionally hasty and capricious in its decisions. The non-citizens 
formed a middle class, generally engaged in trade, having no poli- 
tical rights ; with the slaves they formed the bulk of the population. 
The Athenian Demos has been fully described by Grote, and de- 
fended by him and by Freeman against Mitford and his aristocratical 
school. "The essence of this typical Greek democracy is that 
it unites all power, legislative and judicial, in the assembly of the 

1 Freeman, " Essays," second series, p. 116. 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 83 

people Its legislative pawers were greatly narrowed by one 

of its own committees, but its executive powers were unbounded. 
.... This mob restrained itself just where the modern Parliament 
gives itself full freedom, and it gave itself full freedom just where a 
modern Parliament restrains itself." The practice of ostracism, the 
legal banishment of dangerous popular leaders, is defended with 
good reason as better than revolutionary proscription and bills of 
attainder. By this plan " the honourable exile of one stood instead 

of the proscription of many Mitford was right enough in 

assuming that an English county meeting reached the very height 
of political ignorance ; only he should not have thence leaped to 

a similar conclusion as to the assembled people of Athens 

Such writers forget that the common life of the Athenians was itself 
the best of political educations. We suspect that the average 
Athenian citizen was in political intelligence above the average 

English member of Parliament The defect of the Demos 

was that it was the offspring of an enthusiasm too highly strung, and 
of a citizenship too narrow to allow of lasting greatness." 1 This last 
remark of the earnest common-sense historian qualifies the implied 
admiration which precedes. 

Thus the democracy of Athens was an exclusive and privileged 
class, altogether different from the democracies of France or America, 
or the ideal democracies of some of our political constitution-mongers 
from the Abbe Sieves down to Major Cartwright. In fact, all the 
democracies were exclusive and aristocratic, far beyond what we 
have seen exemplified in modern times among the French, German, 
Italian, and English noble and titled classes. Commerce and the 
mechanical arts were despised. " In well-regulated states/' Aristotle 
remarks, " the lower order of mechanics are not admitted to the 
rights of citizenship." In Thebes, for instance, no one who within 
ten years had been engaged in retail dealing could be elected into 
the magistracy ; but, while it was degrading for a Greek to carry on 
any of those employments personally, he could, without losing his 
respectability, have them conducted by others on his account ; hence, 
manufactories and workshops, as well as mines and lands, were held 
by the first men in the state. These narrow prejudices may be ex- 
cused in the case of the Greeks ; among professedly Christian nations, 
whose " Great Teacher," by his own position and practice, dignified 
and sanctified manual labour, the indulgence in such exclusiveness 

1 Freeman, "Essays," second series, pp. 107-147. 
G 2 



84 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

is not only silly and hurtful, but sinful The slave class were 
chiefly the property of the free citizens, who owed the leisure which 
gave them the opportunity of political life to the enforced labour of 
bondsmen, an inconsistency which none of the great writers of 
antiquity appear to have noticed. To them slavery was a necessity, 
and it had, in their opinion, always existed, and that no civilised 
society could exist without it. Politically, it was to be checked and 
regulated, but supported. The Athenian slaves were generally the 
best treated in Greece, and had many holidays ; but the slaves of 
Nicias, hired out to labour in the mines of Laurium, were less 
fortunate. A thousand of them were let out to Souas, the Thracian, 
at an obol per day (one penny and a farthing) for each, the lessee 
being bound to restore to him the same in number ! The yearly rent 
paid for each slave was thus half the price paid for him in the 
market. If a slave lived for three years, Nicias made a profit of 
fifty per cent, on the outlay. These slaves at Laurium worked three 
hundred and sixty days in the year, had only five days' rest in the 
three hundred and sixty-five days : the work was poisonous. 1 Nicias, 
the Athenian, would have had small sympathy with our philanthropic 
legislation on slavery, factory labour, &c., &c. The jealousy of the 
citizen class towards the wealthier and highly-descended families 
occasioned most of the seditious and party contests which retarded 
the prosperity and eventually destroyed the liberties of Greece. The 
taxation fell heavily upon this wealthy class, not only in direct pay- 
ments, but in the obligation to provide for public festivals and shows, 
and to meet the extraordinary cost of the galleys in time of war. 
There were not only rivalries among the Greek states, but also a 
desire for conquest, and for the annexation of neighbouring territory, 
even among these petty republics. Sparta had conquered and 
made slaves of the Messenians; but it had rivals in Tegea and 
Argos. Athens had rivals in Megara and ./Egina. The hostile 
invasion of the King of Persia obliged these rivals to unite for 
their common protection and for the glory of Greece. Instead 
of remaining a mere multitude of small states, disunited, envious, 
and jealous of each other, they were led by the vigorous ex- 
ample of Athens and Sparta to unite, although but for a while, in 
resistance to Persia. The success at Marathon against the army of 
Darius 490 B.C. emboldened them to resist the more formidable 
invasion of Xerxes, in which the number of the Persian armies, the 
difficulty of finding subsistence for them, and the unfitness of the 

1 MahafFy, " Rambles in Greece," pp. 169, 170. 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 85 

mountain territory of Greece for the action of large armies, were all 
in favour of the success of the Greek patriotic resistance. It was, 
however, easy for the Persian army to pass through Thrace, Mace- 
donia, and Thessaly. The first serious check to them was given at 
the Pass of Thermopylae, where Leonidas, with his three hundred 
Spartans and seven hundred allies, fell, overwhelmed by numbers 
(July 6, 480 B.C.). The Athenians wisely abandoned Athens, which 
was burnt by the Persians (July 20), and looked to their fleet for 
deliverance. By this fleet the Persian fleet was defeated and 
destroyed at Salamis (September 23, 480 B.C.). Xerxes, after eight 
months' campaign, returned to Persia, crossing the Hellespont 
leisurely and with kingly state, leaving Mardonius as commander of 
the Persian army in Greece. Mardonius occupied Athens, but he 
was defeated and killed at Platcea (September 25, 479 B.C.) by the 
Greeks under Aristides and Pausanias. On the same day the 
Persian fleet was defeated at Mycale by Leotychides and Xanthippus ; 
after which the war became an aggressive one. Attempts have been 
made, by Richardson in 1770 and by the Comte de Gobineau in his 
" Histoire des Perses" (published before 1870), to represent the 
history of the Persian and Greek wars in a point of view favourable 
to the Persians. They have been regarded by the learned as eccen- 
tricities of opinion requiring no serious notice. In this aggressive 
war the leadership was with Sparta ; the object was to free the Greek 
colonies in Asia Minor from Persian rule, Sparta was far from dis- 
interested, the Spartans being generally unfair, tyrannical rulers. "At 
home, under an iron system which taught each successive generation 
that their highest virtue was to preserve, not to impair, the institutions 
of their fathers, they were utterly unable to act the part of conquerors ; 
for conquest, being the greatest of all possible changes, can only be 

conducted by those who know how to change wisely Thus 

the Spartan had no idea of turning their (after) triumph over Athens 
(at the end of the Peloponnesian War) to any other account than 
that of their pride and rapacity.''' * So also, in this war against Persia, 
envy and jealousy of Athens led them to oppose the fortification 
of Athens and the Piraeus (478-477 B.C.), which, however, wer 
accomplished by the policy of Themistocles. 

The haughtiness of the Spartan Pausanias disgusted the Greeks, 
and the hegemony or leadership of the Greek fleets was transferred 
to Athens, the Spartans withdrawing their four hundred and seventy 
ships. This maritime league under Athens unfortunately led the 

1 Arnold's " Rome," vol. i. pp. 493, 4. 



86 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

Athenians, like the Spartans, to consider what was merely military 
precedence as implying the rights of sovereignty. An opposition 
league was then formed by Sparta, which had, at that time, full 
rule over the Peloponnesus, and partially over other states beyond 
Peloponnesus. Cimon, the Athenian commander, is said, after the 
defeat of the Persian fleet and army near Cyprus, to have concluded 
a peace, 449 B.C., with the Persian king Artaxerxes, in which the 
Great King recognised the independence of the Greek colonies, and 
Consented that his fleet should not navigate the ^Egean, and that his 
troops should not approach within three days' march of the coast ; 
but this is supposed to be an exaggeration of Greek vanity. Mean- 
while, the hatred of the Spartans towards Athens, fully reciprocated 
by Athens, found occasion for open war in the dispute between 
Corcyra and Corinth, its mother-country, 434-432 B.C. The 
Athenians took part with the Corcyrians, and the Spartans with the 
Corinthians ; and this was the commencement of the Peloponnesian 
War, which lasted 431-421 and 418-404 B.C., in round numbers 
twenty-seven years (including the three or four years' truce), and of 
which the only valuable result was the history of Thucydides. The 
leaders on the side of Athens were Cimon, Pericles, and Alcibiades ; 
on the side of Sparta, Lysander. The great orator, Pericles, exercised 
a commanding influence in Athens, until his death 429 B.C. Under 
his auspices the grand buildings, the glory of Athens, were erected, 
and the fine arts largely patronised. Athens, during the war, had 
looked forward to the formation of an empire over the Grecian 
colonies in Sicily, and had sent an expedition, under Nicias, 415 B.C., 
'the largest ever sent by any Greek state. It was an enterprise 
unparalleled in the past history of Greece. The object of the 
Athenians was not merely to assist the Ionian colonies in Sicily 
against the Dorians (Syracuse, &c.), but to bring Sicily and the 
Greek colonies in south Italy under Athenian influence, and to form 
with these a league against the Carthaginian power, which had ever 
been adverse to the Greeks. The disastrous end of this expedition 
"hastened the ruin of Athens, which was compelled to submit to 
Sparta 404 B.C. It is remarkable that two great events, bearing 
upon the interests of the Greek population, have been transacted in 
Sicily. The defeat of the Carthaginians at Himera, who had 
1 leagued with Xerxes to attack the Greek colonies, while his armies 
were invading Greece itself, in 480 B.C., is one of these ; the other 
: is the defeat of the Athenian attack on Sicily, 415-413 B.C. "The 
late of the whole western world was involved in that sweeping ruin 
of the fleet of Athens in the harbour of Syracuse. Had that great 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 87 

expedition proved victorious, the energies of Greece during the next 
eventful century would have found their field in the West, no less 
than in the East. Greece, and not Rome, might have conquered 
Carthage ; Greek, and not Latin, might have been at this day the 
principal element of the languages of Spain, of France, and of Italy j 
and the laws of Athens, rather than those of Rome, might be the 
foundation of the laws of the civilised world." x The occupation of 
Athens by the Spartans was followed by the nomination of thirty 
men the Tyrants with supreme power, by whom one thousand 
four hundred impeachments and executions were at once carried out. 
These, with their successors (ten in number), were expelled by the 
efforts of Thrasybulus and a party of exiles, by whom the Jaws of 
Solon were restored. Mahaffy remarks that the massacre of Corcyra 
428 B.C., the murder of two hundred and twenty-five Platsean 
prisoners in cold blood by the Spartans 428 B.C., the condemnation 
by the Athenians of the Mitylenians to death, of whom one thousand 
were actually executed 427 B.C., should not be forgotten in our 
admiration of Greek culture and refinement. The Athenians put 
many hundreds of the inhabitants of Melos to the sword to make 
way for a colony of Athenian citizens. Lysander, after the battle of 
^Egospotami, 405 B.C., put to death three thousand prisoners, who 
submitted to a fate which, had they been successful, they would have 
inflicted on the Spartans. With all their intellect, the Greeks were 
wanting in heart ; their humanity was spasmodic, not constant, and 
included no chivalry to foes or to helpless slaves. 2 " A long and 
careful survey of the extant literature of ancient Greece has convinced 
me that the pictures usually drawn of the old Greeks are idealised, 
and that the real people were of a very different .... of a much 
lower character. They were probably as clever a people as can be 
found in the world, and fit for any mental work whatever." 3 

4. In the thirty-three years which elapsed between the conclusion 
of the Peloponnesian War and the war of the Thebans against 
Sparta, 404-371 B.C., the philosopher Socrates was put to death in 
Athens on a charge of impiety, 399 B.C. The expedition of the ten 
thousand Greeks, under Xenophon, to assist Cyrus the Younger in his 
revolt against his brother Artaxerxes, failed through the death of 
Cyrus in battle at Cunaxa ; but the Greeks managed to retreat from 
the very heart of the empire with safety, a proof to them of the 

1 Arnold's " History of Rome," vol. i. pp. 347, 348. 

2 Mahaffy, " Social Life in Greece," pp. 176, 234-243. 

3 Ibid., " Rambles in Greece," pp. 19-22. 



88 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

weakness of the Persian empire, 401 B.C. The Spartans made a 
disgraceful peace with Persia, called the Peace of Antalddas, 317 B.C., 
by which the Persian supremacy over the Asiatic colonies was re- 
established. This, if true, was the result of the rivalry of Athens 
and Sparta, and of the help which both of them had received from 
Persia. Then, the Great King had found it easier to influence the 
leaders of political parties in Greece by bribery, and to engage them 
in wars with each other, than to conquer them in the battle-field. 
The contest between the Spartans and the Thebans commanded by 
Epaminondas and Pelopidas, tfi-tfz B.C., in which the Spartans 
lost the battle of Mantinea, was humiliating to Sparta; but, not- 
withstanding this check to Sparta, Thebes, after the death of 
Epaminondas, was unable to take the lead. It has thus become 
evident that there was no leading power in Greece which could 
secure a union of its states against foreign aggression. " It had 
never been a compact society, a nation, but a number of indepen- 
dent political units, animated by feelings of suspicion and jealousy, 
and dislike of all, except the members of its own city. Beyond this 
stage, which made the city everything, Greece, as a whole, never 
advanced. 1 Men as nearly allied in blood as the men of York and 
Bristol still regarded the power of making war upon each other as 
the highest of their privileges (a proof of the possession of sovereign 
power within their own limits), and looked upon the exercise of this 
power, not as a stern necessity, but as a common incident in the 
ordinary course of things." Hence, it was hardly possible for Greece 
to retain its independence, when a powerful, concentrated military 
monarchy had arisen on its very borders, for they were unwilling to 
acknowledge the supremacy of any one state as their leader, by 
whom, united together, they might hope to repel even a superior 
power. The most natural and desirable of all conditions for Greece 
would have been such a confederacy, a permanent bond of union ; 
yet the thought of such a general fixed union of the states of Greece, 
on equal terms, seems never to have occurred to a single Greek 
statesman. This neglect is a reproach to their practical ability. 
There were, no doubt, great difficulties to overcome ; so there were 
in Switzerland, in the Seven United Provinces, and in the thirteen 
British colonies in America ; but among these, when the necessity 
was evident, there were found men able to conciliate opposition and 
to carry out the union. Greece, however, had not trained men to 
feel and care for the Greek people as a whole. The sympathies of 

1 Coxe, " Persians and Greeks," p. 4. 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 89 

the most patriotic were limited to his own city, and thus disunited, 
led astray by local politicians, caring only for party interests, the 
Greeks could oppose no effectual resistance to Macedonia, the rising 
power outside, which was well acquainted with its weakness. Greece 
had poets, philosophers, and orators, and great soldiers, and able 
generals, but they had no Cavour or Stein ; they had no great 
general in whom they could trust to fight for Grecian objects. 
Instead of this they were wasting their powers as mercenary troops 
in the service of Persia, or Egypt, or Carthage. Greece at last 
submitted to Macedonian supremacy, because its petty states were 
too proud and jealous to acknowledge one of their own states as a 
leader. From the time of the successful resistance to the Persian 
invasion, there had been a gradual decline in the moral feeling of 
both the Athenians and Spartans, and of the Greeks generally. 
Increase of luxurious habits, which required enlarged pecuniary 
means, with the increasing cost of the armies, felt by all the cities, 
arising out of the employment of mercenary troops a practice which 
grew and increased in the Peloponnesian War induced the petty 
states, Athens and Sparta also, to look to the Persian government of 
Asia Minor, and to the Great King himself, for subsidies in their 
wars with each other, and to rejoice in this unequal alliance. 

5. Meanwhile the ISRAELITES who had been carried captive, at first 
by the Assyrians and lastly by the Babylonians, had been permitted 
to return to their own land, by the decree of Cyrus, B.C. 536, after 
seventy years of captivity (dating from the first beginning of the 
Captivity, 606 B.C.). The number of those who returned with 
Zerubbabel (prince of Judah) and Jeshua (the high priest) was about 
50,000, chiefly of the tribes attached to the former kingdom of Judah, 
though there appear to have been portions of the other ten tribes 
with them. Hence they were called Jews. They began to rebuild 
Jerusalem, to restore the walls, and to lay the foundations of the 
Temple. In this they were opposed by the SAMARITANS, originally a 
mongrel race of heathens (2 Kings xvii. 23, 24), mixed up with a 
degraded class of the old Israelitish population, who had, however, 
retained some imperfect knowledge of the old Jewish religion, and 
desired to be identified with the Jews. This union was rejected, 
their claim to the Jewish nationality denied, and hence their oppo- 
sition to the Tews in Jerusalem, by their intrigues with the Persian 
court and with the local officials of Persia. THE TEMPLE was, 
however, rebuilt and dedicated, 515 B.C., and many, probably of the 
later captivities who had seen the old temple rejoiced, and yet wept, 
when the foundations of the new were laid, 535 B.C. EZRA, a priest 



90 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

in favour with Artaxerxes (Longimanus), was permitted, seventy-eight 
years after the first party had returned to Jerusalem, to lead a band 
of Jews returning to their own country, and was vested with power 
to regulate the affairs of the newly-restored people, 458 B.C. 
NEHEMIAH, one of the royal cup-bearers, also in favour with Arta- 
xerxes, was sent, 444 B.C., to regulate the government and to establish 
more thoroughly a rigid adherence to the Law of Moses. The 
prophets Haggai and Zechariah, who lived for some time after the 
return, were followed by Malachi, the last of the Prophets, contem- 
porary with Nehemiah. The strict reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah, 
especially the law against mixed marriages, were offensive to many, 
even of the priests. One Manasseh, the son of Joiada the High 
Priest, left Jerusalem and built a rival temple on Mount Gerizim, near 
Samaria, carrying with him the Pentateuch as the only authority for the 
Mosaic Law, 409 B.C. The High Priest of the Jews, with a council 
(the Sanhedrim), had the direction of Jewish affairs, under the 
Persian Government, which always respected the religion of the Jewish 
people. The Samaritans, with their new temple, were regarded by 
the Jews with great aversion as schismatics. The Hebrew language 
gradually changed to a Syriac-Chaldaic dialect. No writing which 
was not accepted as a sacred book before 420 B.C. was included in 
the Canon of the Old Testament, according to the testimony of 
Josephus, l a priest and competent witness ; no writing being 
accepted as of divine authority which had not had the sanction of 
a prophet ; and we know there was no prophet from Malachi, 
400 B.C., to the time of John the Baptist. This is confirmed as true 
(up to their own time) by Jesus the son of Sirach (Ecclesiastes 
xlix. 10), and by the author of the first book of Maccabees, iv. 46 
and ix. 27, 14-41. 

6. After the death of Epaminondas, PHILIP OF MACEDON slowly 
and almost imperceptibly crept into the position at which he aimed 
from the very first. Philip had been three years a hostage at Thebes, 
and had learned the art of war under that able commander Epami- 
nondas. He established a regular. army, larger and better disciplined 
than that of any other Grecian state. In the Sacred War he assisted 
the Thebans and Thessalian nobles in the war against the Phokians, 
who had plundered the temple of Delphi, 355 B.C., of 10,000 talents. 
Athens and Sparta supported the Phokians. In the end peace was 
made, the Phokians conquered, and their position in the Amphic- 
tyonic Council given to Philip, 346 B.C. Before the conclusion of 

1 "Josephus against Apion," book i. chap. 8. 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great \ 330 B. C. 91 

this Sacred War Philip had made himself master of the thirty cities of 
Olynthia. The Olynthians had sought the alliance of Athens, and 
the great orator, Demosthenes, had delivered his first great speech 
against Philip, B.C. 352. The Athenians were divided in their views 
respecting the policy of Philip, and when convinced of the necessity 
of opposing him they were too late. The Athenians and Thebans 
were defeated by Philip at Chaeronea, B.C. 338, and Philip was thus 
master of Greece. At a congress of all the Greek states, at Corinth, 
war was declared against Persia, and Philip was appointed General- 
in-Chief of the forces of Greece. He was soon after assassinated, 
336 B.C. ; but his son and successor, Alexander, after checking the 
inroads of the northern barbarians and capturing Thebes, which had 
revolted after the death of Philip, prepared to carry out his father's 
plans. The severe example of Thebes, rased to the very ground, 
was a proof to the Greeks of the power and determination of the 
young monarch, whom they had accepted as their leader in the room 
of his father. ALEXANDER crossed the Hellespont with about 40,000 
men; an army so perfectly disciplined, and so superior to any 
other army, that it could probably, without any difficulty, at that 
time have conquered the world. This was no wild enterprise after 
the Greek mercenaries were beaten. After the death of Xerxes 
domestic treasons, the frequent rebellions of Egypt, the lax adminis- 
tration of the central government, which could not prevent the 
private wars of satraps against satraps, and was compelled to allow 
the leading satrapies to become hereditary, were plain indications, 
palpable to all Greece, of the decadence of the empire. The Persian 
armies, though large, were a mere militia, the only efficient troops 
being bodies of Greek mercenaries commanded by Memnon the 
Rhodian and others. When Alexander, after visiting the site of 
Troy, had reached the Granicus, a small stream flowing from Mount 
Ida into the Propontis, Memnon advised the Persian generals to avoid 
a battle by retreating, to lay waste the country, and destroy the towns 
in their line of march, so that, for want of provisions, the invaders 
might be checked. This advice, which might have saved the 
empire, was rejected as degrading to its dignity. The Persians were 
defeated at the Granicus ; and as the Greek, Memnon, the only 
person likely to have been a formidable opponent, soon after died, 
the career of Alexander was unimpeded until he came to Issus, a 
town in the mountain-ranges of Cilicia, near the passes, the Syrian 
gates. In the plain near Issus, Darius Codomannus advanced with 
600,000 men, and with him his mother, wives, and harem, as il 
certain of victory, and the more so as he had among them 30,000 



92 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

Greek mercenaries. He was defeated and lost his baggage, and the 
whole of his family and harem were made prisoners. In this battle 
Alexander not only defeated the Persians, but the republican southern 
Greeks, their allies, and the special enemies of his rule, 333 B.C. 
After this the conqueror passed through Syria. Sidon, the oldest of 
the Phoenician cities, received him as a deliverer. Tyre resisted, 
but, after a seven months' siege, was taken by storm, with great 
destruction of life. 30,000 were sold for slaves, 2,000 crucified. In 
the course of the siege the island of Tyre was united by Alexander's 
mole to the mainland, and thus Tyre was, and remained defenceless, 
332 B.C. Gaza was next besieged, and taken after three months ; 
and then it is probable that Alexander visited Jerusalem, and was 
conciliated by the High Priest Jaddua. Egypt made no resistance, 
and Alexander founded the town of Alexandria, as a link between 
the East and the West, and as an emporium of the trade of the East 
and of India, 331 B.C. Leaving Egypt, Alexander crossed the 
Euphrates into Mesopotamia, and met Darius at Gaugamela (twenty 
miles from Arbela), a wide plain between the Tigris and the moun- 
tains of Kurdistan. Darius's forces were estimated at a million by 
some, and by others at 240,000, with 200 scythe chariots and 15 
elephants. The loss of the Macedonians was trifling, but 300,000 
of the Persians are said to have fallen in the contest, which ended in 
the defeat of Darius, 331 B.C., who, the next year, was murdered by 
the traitor Bessus. Alexander passed through the whole of the dis- 
tant provinces to the north-east, and invaded Northern India, but 
was compelled, by the unwillingness of his troops to pass beyond the 
Hyphasis (the Sutledge), to return westward, 325-324 B.C. The 
return was as adventurous as his previous marches. Vessels were 
built on the Sutledge. The army sailed down the Indus to the 
Indian Ocean. Thence Alexander and the army proceeded through 
Gedrosia and Caramania to Persepolis. The fleet, under Nearchus, 
proceeded to the Persian Gulf, keeping close to the land, arrived first 
at Harmozeia (Ormus), and then at the mouth of the Euphrates. This 
voyage is celebrated as " the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea." At 
Babylon, which Alexander had designed to make the seat of his 
empire, he received ambassadors from the Carthaginians, the 
Romans, and three other peoples of Italy. He had grand plans of 
uniting the people of the East with the West. He thought that the 
predominant races might be amalgamated with the subject races by 
inter-marriages, education, equal laws, and commerce. It is said 
that he designed to explore the coast of Arabia to the head of the 
Red Sea, then to circumnavigate Africa, and, entering the Mediter- 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great > 330 B. C. 93 

ranean by the Pillars of Hercules, to spread the terror of his arms 
along its western and northern shores, and, finally, to explore the 
northern extremity of the Lake Mseotis (Sea of Azoff). The charac- 
ter of Alexander had deteriorated, as was manifested by the murders 
of Philotas, of Parmenio, of Clitus, and of Callisthenes, on most 
frivolous grounds, and by his assumption of divine honours. In the 
latter part of his life he acted, in the opinion of the Greeks, the part 
of a barbarian rather than that of a Grecian king. Death put an 
end to his plans, at the early age of thirty-three, by a fever the result 
of excess at Babylon, 323 B.C. Niebuhr, Droysen, and Grote express 
opinions unfavourable to the character of Alexander. Archdeacon 
Williams, Thirl wall, and Freeman are his defenders, the latter 
especially. In his opinion, Thirlwall's narrative of the History of 
Alexander " is the nearest approach to the perfection of a critical 
history .... It is, therefore, on the whole, the Alexander of 
Thirlwall, rather than the Alexander of Grote or of Droysen, who 
deserves to live in the memory of mankind, and to challenge the 
admiration of the world." 1 

The fate of Tyre was foretold by the prophet Zechariah (490 B.C.) 
x. 3, 4 ; the rise and fall of the Persian empire by Daniel (553 B.C.) 
viii. 1-7, 20-21 xi. i, 3. The imagery employed by the prophet, 
namely, the ram's head, with horns one higher than the other, is 
found in the ruin of Persepolis. A he-goat was the Macedonian 
standard. 

7. Meanwhile two powerful states, one in Africa, one in Italy, were 
gradually extending their territories and consolidating their power, 
thus preparing for a contest for the dominion of the West. These 
were : CARTHAGE in North Africa, and ROME in Central Italy, to 
whose early history we have already referred. The history of the 
rivalry of these two great nations forms a most interesting chapter in 
the history of the world. Carthage was the ally of Persia against 
Greece. The people of Selinus, in Sicily, having invited the help of 
the Carthaginians, this invasion was defeated by Gelon, of Syracuse, 
and Theron, of Agrigentum, at Himera, 480 B.C. Soon after, the 
Siculi, the old people of Sicily, were subdued by the Greek colonists, 
who destroyed Trinacria, the capital of the Siculi, 452-440. The 
Carthaginians again invaded Sicily, assisted by the Siculi (409), and 
made great progress, until, by treaty with Syracuse, the west of Sicily 
was yielded to Carthage the east being under Syracuse, 340 B.C. 
A large portion of the south and east of Spain was subdued by the 

1 Freeman, " Essays," second series, pp. 171, 172. 



94 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

Carthaginians ; but the inhabitants of the Carthaginian subject 
provinces, whether in Africa, or Sicily, or Spain, were never 
assimilated to their conquerors, but remained a distinct, and gener- 
ally inimical people. The newly-formed republic in ROME had to 
emancipate itself from Etrurian control, and regain, by little and little, 
the power and territory it had lost in the revolution of 510 B.C. The 
dispute respecting the monopoly of the public lands by the patricians, 
headed, on the part of the people, by Spurius Cassius, 486 B.C., by 
Genucius, 473 B.C., disturbed the commonwealth. The senate opposed, 
not only openly, but by secret murders. Spurius Cassius " shared the 
fate of Agis and Marino Faliero " l ; Genucius was found murdered 
in his chamber. Another grievance, the inequality of the bearing of 
the law upon the interests of the plebeians, was considered, and all the 
powers of the consuls were superseded, 450 B.C., by the appointment 
of the decemvirs, ten commissioners appointed to prepare a new code 
of laws. The result was the Ten Tables, which were promulgated for 
the information of all classes. After two years, the misconduct of 
Appius Claudius led to a revolt, and to the restoration of the old 
consular government. It was while these dissensions were going on 
the Gauls from the north invaded Italy, plundering Etruria and 
its vicinity. The Romans came in collision with them, and were 
defeated on the river Allia, and their army destroyed, 389 B.C. 
Rome itself was occupied and burnt ; only the Capitol remained. 
The siege was relieved, either by the help of Camillus and his troops, 
or by a large payment to the Gauls. After this, the dissensions of the 
higher patrician classes with the plebeians, which had commenced 
in the kingly period, was aggravated by the pressure of the debts in- 
curred by the plebeians in the time of war, when, at their own 
expense, they had to fight the battles of the state. By the following 
steps a more equitable condition of affairs was secured, (i) The 
consular power was modified by the appointment of tribunes of the 
people (493 B.C.) intrusted with extraordinary powers for the protection 
of popular interests ; and in 470 B.C. there were chosen by the tribes 
alone, through the Publilian Law of Volero, "the second grand 
charter of public liberties. 3 The laws were reduced to writing by 
the appointed ten the decemviri, 451-447 B.C. (2) The legislative 
power of the senate was checked by the additional influence gained 
by the assemblies of the tribes (in which the plebeians had the chief 
power). By laws made 449, and confirmed 339 and 287 B.C., the 
resolutions of these assemblies, instead of being simply binding on 

1 Arnold. 2 Ibidi 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B. C. 95 

the plebeians, were recognised as binding all classes, without the sanc- 
tion of the senate or the assemblies of the curies or of the centuries. 
The tribunes had the power of impeaching magistrates, generals, and 
consuls (after the expiration of their term of office). To the senate there 
remained one check on the licence of the democracy. They could at 
any time create a dictator with absolute power. The first appointment 
took place 498 B.C. This office, no doubt, saved the republic several 
times, and at length was used by Marius and Sylla, and, last of all, 
by Julius Caesar, to destroy the spurious sham republic, which, by 
degrees, had superseded the genuine one. (3) An equality of civil 
and social rights naturally followed the success of the plebeians in 
their struggle for a share in the legislative power. (The legislation 
of the decemvirs, in 450-449, gave increased power to the plebeians 
in the tribes). The law forbidding the intermarriage of patricians 
and plebeians was abrogated 445 B.C. The consulship was thrown 
open to the plebeians 366 B.C., and by the year 300 B.C. they were 
declared eligible to fill all the offices of the republic. Thus united, 
the Romans had nearly accomplished the conquest of Italy by the 
time of the rule of Alexander in Greece and Asia. All the petty 
states of Latium, and Etruria, and Central Italy had been subjugated. 
This success may be accounted for, in a great measure, to the facility 
of associating the conquered people with themselves, making them 
partners in the work of aggression, and in due time admitting them 
to a share in its civil government. With the Samnites, the bravest 
and most formidable of the Italian rivals of Rome, the Romans had 
two wars : 343-341, 326-304. At the end of the second war they 
became politically subject to Rome. It was well for the Romans, and 
for the world at large, that Alexander the Great had been led to the 
conquest of the East rather than westward to the conquest of Italy. 
Livy thinks that the Romans would have been fully equal in the 
contest, and at last victorious ; but this is the opinion of national 
vanity only. Degraded as Greek society had begun to be in the 
time of Alexander, it was capable of benefiting the East, but the 
Italics and other peoples of Western Europe would have been morally 
and socially injured by the occupancy of their territories, and by the 
debasing influence upon their social life, which must have followed 
their conquest by the Greeks. The old Romans and the people of 
Central Italy were at this time remarkable for their sober and 
moderate habits, and their rigid morality, their respect for law and 
order. This favourable condition of society continued until after the 
Second Punic War. 

8. INDIA became better known to the Greeks by the invasion of 



96 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

Alexander the Great. At that time there was a large Aryan kingdom 
on the Ganges, and also some very powerful non-Aryan states. 
Chandragupta (312 B.C.), the opponent of Seleucus, ruled over all 
North India, to the Vindya Mountains. Darius Hystaspes had long 
before conquered Cabul, and levied a tribute of nearly two millions 
sterling on that land. Skylax, his admiral, had sailed down the 
Indus, and up the Red Sea back again to Egypt. Alexander's 
admiral, Nearchus, sailed down the Indus, and arrived at the mouth 
of the Euphrates, 326 B.C. The Buddhist reaction against Brahmin- 
ism was gaining ground. 

9. CHINA continued in a disordered state, divided into so many 
states during the Chow Dynasty. Mencius, i.e., Mengtsen, the 
great philosopher, lived about 371 B.C. a teacher of practical ethics 
like Confucius. 

10. The LITERATURE of this period was mainly Greek. The period 
from 500-300 B.C. may be considered as the golden age of Greek 
culture both as to literature and art. It was, however, confined to 
Athens and the Greek colonies in Africa, Sicily, and Italy, (i) His- 
torians. The earliest is Hecatseus, the father of history, 500 B.C. ; 
Herodotus, the great pictorial historian, 484-408 B.C. ; Thucydides, 
the philosophical historian of the Peloponnesian War, 471-411 B.C. ; 
Xenophon, whose narrative of the expedition of Cyrus the Younger 
and the retreat of the ten thousand Greeks from the Euphrates, made 
him famous as a general as well as a writer, 444-362 B.C. ; Charon 
of Lampsacus, 464 B.C. ; Ctesias the physician, 405-401 B.C. (2) 
The great tragic poets, who were the influential moral teachers of 
their age ; ^Eschylus, 500 B.C. ; Sophocles and Euripides, 480 B.C. 
(3) Satire and comedy. Aristophanes and Menander of the middle 
comedy, 485 B.C. The early tragedies were first exhibited on the 
stage by Thespis 535 B.C. (4) The lyric poet Theognis, 525-488 
B.C., describes with high aristocratical indignation the overthrow of 
his party in Megara. (5) The fine arts, architecture, sculpture, 
painting, were cultivated with zeal in Athens, and especially patronised 
by Pericles; the names of Phidias, Polycletus, Praxiteles, and 
Lysippus (sculptors), Zeuxis, Polygnotus, and Apelles (painters), 
Ictinus, Callicrates, Callimachus, 400 B.C., Hermogenes, 350 B.C. 
(architects), stand forth as the highest in their respective professions. 
It is scarcely necessary to apologise for the fine arts. " If the fancy, 
the sense of beauty, grace, and elegance are never to be addressed, 
the higher faculties will grow torpid from disuse, the mind will 
dwindle and degenerate, and intellectual progress will be arrested. 
.... A race without wants is a race without ideas A thing 



to the Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 97 

of beauty is a joy for ever." 1 (6) The great orators, Gorgias, 
444 B.C., Antiphon, Andocides, with Pericles and Lysias, 430-400 
B.C., Isocrates, 436-338 B.C., Isaeus, Lycurgus, Demosthenes, 382 - 
324 B.C., and ^Eschines, 389-314 B.C. (7) The physical a.n& mathe- 
matical sciences were at first connected with the development of the 
early philosophy by Thales, Anaximander, Pythagoras, and Anaxi- 
menes and others, as already noticed (p. 72); Hippocrates, the 
father of medical science, 460-357 B.C. ; Eudoxus of Cnidus, 406- 
350 B.C., cultivated astronomy, and made the first map of the stars. 
Heraclides of Pontus taught the daily rotation of the earth on its 
own axis and the immovability of the firmament of the fixed stars. 
Aristotle, born 381 B.C., was as highly distinguished for his labours 
in natural science as in philosophy ; and Theophrastus, his pupil, 
born 371 B.C., was the father of the science of botany. (8) Music 
was cultivated in Athens, and in 444 B.C. Pericles had the Odieum 
built for musical performances ; Aristoxenes of Tarentum, a writer 
on music, 350-330 B.C. (9) Philosophy. The dissatisfaction resulting 
from the insufficiency of all theories to solve "the problem of 
existence," produced the Sophists, 2 a much-calumniated body of 
philosophers, stoutly defended by Lewes and Grote. They formed 
no sect ; each teacher stood on his own individual opinion ; their 
main talent was in the art of disputation ; the chief early repre- 
sentatives of this class were Gorgias, 440 B.C. (the nihilist) ; Prota- 
goras (the individualist); Prodicus, 420 B.C. (the moralist) ; Hippias 
(the polymathist). The later representatives are Polus (the rheto- 
rician) ; Thrasymachus (who taught that right was might) ; Callicles, 
Euthydemus, Diagoras of Melos, with Critias, the enemy of 
Socrates, are regarded as both morally and intellectually inferior to 
their predecessors. Socrates, 470-400 B.C., the Athenian philo- 
sopher, was the disinterested opponent of sophistry, mysticism, and 
philosophical charlatanism; bold and independent in his political 
life, he had a conviction of duty impelling him to advocate truth 
and justice, and to enlighten the opinions of his townsmen by 
private converse with all coming in contact with him ; he taught 
without fee or payment of any kind, endeavouring especially to arrive 
at clear ideas on moral subjects. Attacked and ridiculed by 
Aristophanes in his comedies, he was at last tried and condemned to 
death on a charge of impiety, and also of being a corruptor of youth, 
400 B.C. Among the numerous disciples of Socrates were the 

1 Quarterly Review, vol. clii. p. 545. 

2 Lewes, " History of Philosophy," p. 87. 

H 



98 From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 539 B.C., 

founders of the Cynic school, of the Cyrenaics, the Sceptics, the 
Megaric school, and those of Elis and Eretria. But the most cele- 
brated of his pupils were PLATO and ARISTOTLE. It is impossible to 
give, within any reasonable limits, even the barest sketch of the 
philosophy of Plato, undoubtedly the greatest of the philosophers. 
He taught the existence of an eternal first cause God, from whom 
emanate the souls of men ; but " it is Plato's doctrine of ideas 
which constitutes his peculiar realism, and in virtue of which he has 
been considered the father of the realistic philosophy." He thought 
that the genuine philosopher " might ascend beyond the sphere of 
sense, perception, and opinion to the direct intuition of that super- 
celestial world in which dwelt the essences and originals of all things 
true and beautiful. , This super-celestial sphere, the home of the 
gods and of the purified and enfranchised philosophic spirit, he held 
to be spiritual, eternal, and immutable, such as might be known by 
the pure intelligence, but was separate from matter or sense ; con- 
taining, however, the original and archetypal ideas, of which all the 
things of time and sense were but the imperfect embodiment and 

shadowy copies It will be seen that Plato's philosophy was 

an attempt to reconcile the sensational scepticism of earlier philo- 
sophers with a deep ground of realism and faith. His doctrine of 
the real, supersensible existence of essences, by participation of 
which all sensible existences and qualities have their being, though 
in itself a mere verbal illusion, playing on abstract terms, laid the 
foundation of the scholastic doctrine of the real and independent 
existence of general terms or abstract ideas, which was the funda- 
mental tenet of the realism of the Middle Age doctors, and which 
was opposed by the nomination of those who held such genera or 
general terms to be the mere names of classes, designating no 
distinct entities." 1 Four leading schools sprang from the teaching 
of Plato, (i) The Academy under his immediate disciples. (2) 
The Peripatetics, under Aristotle. (3) The Epicureans, founded by 
Epicurus, and (4) The Stoics, by Zeno. Of these the most remark- 
able is ARISTOTLE, whom Plato regarded as the mind of his school ; 
he refuted "the grand Platonic dream," the theory of eternal ideas; 
e regarded ideas as " the production of the reason, separating by a 
logical abstraction the particular objects from those relations which 
are common to them all he was, however, no sceptic, he believed 
that truth was an heritage for man." Sir William Hamilton seems 
Dearly "justified in saying that Aristotle held to certain 

1 Dr. James H. Rigg, London Quarterly Review, vol. xv. pp. 582-585. 



to tJie Empire of Alexander the Great, 330 B.C. 99 

primary facts, beliefs, or principles, true but undemonstrable, them- 
selves absolutely certain, and the fountains of certainty to all else ; 
that he 'formed knowledge on belief, and the objective certainty of 
science or the subjective necessity of believing.' .... Of some of 
the chief features in the modern inductive logic it cannot be doubted 
that he had an anticipation, whilst almost unto this day his syllogistic 
logic has ruled unrivalled. Doubtless he over-rated indeed, alto- 
gether misunderstood the value of his deductive logic, which it is 
now well known can be no instrument in itself of direct or proper 

discourse Stoicism maintained that man has within himself 

the test of truth and the power of moral control But its 

main glory was its ethics; its principle of duty and self-abne- 
gation, its high ideal of virtue, the honour it rendered to moral 
excellence." 1 



State of the World, .3.30 B.C. 

EUROPE. 

SPAIN. Kelts and Iberians. Carthaginian settlements in the south 
and east ; a Greek colony at Saguntum. 

BRITAIN AND GAUL occupied mainly by Keltic tribes. The Iberians 
from Spain spread from the Pyrenees to the Garonne. 
Teutonic tribes mixed with the Kelts north of the Seine. 
The Greek colony in Massilia traded by the route of the 
Rhone with Britain. 

GERMANY. A Teutonic population, pressed by the Sclavonic tribes 
from the East. 

SCANDINAVIA. A Teutonic population, pressing the Finns, Lapps, 
and other kindred races northward. 

EASTERN PLAINS OF POLAND, RUSSIA, &c. Peopled mainly by 
Sclavonic races, with Finns, Tschudes, and similar races, to 
the north. Sundry tribes from Central Asia begin to settle 
north of the Black Sea (Euxine). The Greek colonies in 
the Crimea and on the Euxine to the east are the marts for 
the northern trade. 

1 Dr. Rigs, London Quarterly Review, vol. xv. pp. 585-587. 
H 2 



ioo From the Foundation of the Persian Empire, 

ITALY. The Kelts (Gauls) in the north. The Etruscans, and sundry 
tribes in the centre. The Ligurians along the Mediterranean 
from Gaul to the Etruscan boundary. The Greek colonies 
in the south. Rome, which had been recently burnt by the 
Gauls 390 B.C., rapidly advancing towards the conquest of 
Italy. 

SICILY was the battle-ground of the Greek colonies and the 
Carthaginians. 

GREECE. All its republics submit as allies to Macedonia. 

ASIA. 

THE OLD PERSIAN EMPIRE, conquered by Alexander the Great ; the 
Phoenician cities and the Jews under his rule. 

CHINA, under the Chow Dynasty, which ruled over several dependent 
states. 

INDIA became better known to the Greeks by the invasion of Alex- 
ander the Great. Aryan kingdoms in the north and on the 
Ganges, and some powerful native states. By 'the voyage of 
Nearchus from the Indus to the Persian Gulf geographical 
knowledge was increased 326 B.C. 

JAPAN. The Mikado rulers gradually conquering the native Ainos. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT. Conquered by Alexander the Great. Alexandria founded 
by him. 

ETHIOPIA. Petty kingdoms in Napata and other portions of Meroe. 

THE BERBERS over Northern Africa between the Carthaginians and 
the Sahara. The Greek colonies in Cyrene. 

THE CARTHAGINIANS (the enemies) of the Greeks) controlled the sea- 
coasts of North Africa and of Southern and Eastern Spain. 



FOURTH PERIOD, 



From the Empire of Alexander, 330 
to the Christian Era. 



1. THE leading events of this period are (i) The division of the 
Empire of Alexander, followed by the rise of the Parthian empire, 
east of the Euphrates, and occupying in part the position of the 
old Persian empire ; (2) the rivalries of the new Greek kingdoms in 
Macedonia, Egypt, and Syria, a history, on the whole, of cultivated 
sensuality, depravity, and cruelty, as disgusting as it is tiresome ; 
(3) the deterioration of Greece itself, through the loss of its popula- 
tion and resources ; (4) the gradual absorption by Rome of the Greek 
kingdoms and states, and of the territories of Carthage in Africa and 
Spain, and the conquest of Gaul. 

2. The sudden death of Alexander at Babylon, 323 B.C., was 
followed by the dissensions of his leading generals, each aiming at 
the supreme power, and, failing in that, to secure for themselves 
independent kingdoms. In the wars ensuing the family of Alexander 
was destroyed, and the empire divided. The battle of Issus, 301 B.C., 
left Cassander king of Macedonia, Ptolemy Lagus king of Egypt 
including Gyrene ; Seleucus king of Syria and of all Asia to the 
Indus ; Lysimachus king over Thrace and part of Asia Minor ; 
other divisions followed. Lysimachus was killed 283 B.C., and out 
of his kingdom arose the petty kingdoms of Pergamos, Bithynia, 
Pontus, Galatia, and Cappadocia (in Asia Minor). A few years later, 
250 B.C., Bactria (under a race of Greek kings) and the Parthians 
threw off the yoke of the kings of Syria, and their kings, the Arsacidae, 
ruled from the Euphrates to the Indus. Soon after, Armenia revolted 
from Syria, and thus within seventy years after Alexander's death 



102 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

there were no less than eleven kingdoms formed out of his empire, 
besides the petty republics of Greece, which maintained for a while 
their independence. The first formal division of Alexander's empire 
is foretold in Daniel viii. 8. All these states were engaged in 
frequent wars with each other, and, with the exception of Parthia and 
Bactria, were within two centuries conquered by the Romans, and 
formed mere provinces of its vast empire. Bactria was conquered 
by Parthia and the Tartar tribes 125 B.C. 

3. The Grecian republics, though nominally independent, yet were 
greatly influenced by the kings of Macedon. In Athens, DEMO- 
STHENES, the patriotic orator, 322 B.C., and Phocion, the uncorrupt 
administrator, 318 B.C., were sacrificed to party influence. Two 
confederations were formed, to maintain a union of effort in defence 
of the national liberty, by the ^Etolians and Archaeans ; but these 
were separate, and accordingly opposed to each other. The Achcean 
League had for its object freedom and equality for all the Grecian 
states. The leading men in this movement had a high character for 
fairness and probity. About 254 B.C. they began to restore the 
fabric of their old constitution, under Aratus of Sicyon. The 
ALtolian League was simply a revival of the confederation of its tribes. 
It has been called " the curse of Greece," as its leaders manifested 
no self-restraint or sense of right and wrong. In ancient times, as 
Mommsen remarks, " a nation must be hammer or anvil." The 
petty Grecian states were of necessity in the position of the anvil ; 
Philip of Macedonia was the -first hammer, the Romans the second. 
It was impossible to infuse new political life into a people gradually 
and yet rapidly declining in numbers and in resources. The 
conquests of Alexander had opened the East to the enterprise of the 
young and active spirits of the small communities, whose narrow 
limits and bitter factions were distasteful to men to whom all Asia 
and Egypt offered employment and wealth. The poorer classes 
found employment as mercenaries in the East, and in Egypt, and in 
Carthage and Sicily. The loss of population was not filled, up by 
the demand for labour, as Greece had no manufactures of any 
moment, or call for agricultural labour, beyond what was supplied by 
its slave population. This decline of population and of resources 
was obvious within less than a century after the conquests of 
Alexander ; every generation the decay was more observable. Poly- 
bius, 140 B.C., and Strabo, 29 B.C., besides the eloquent reflections 
of Sulpicius to Cicero, which are given in Middleton's " Life of 
Cicero," are witnesses of this decline. Messenia almost deserted; 
Laconia had only thirty towns left in lieu of a hundred ; Arcadia 



to the Christian Era. 103 

utterly decayed, and with ^Etolia and Acarnania devoted to pasturage ; 
Thebes a mere village; Thessaly equally without towns. In the 
time of Plutarch, Greece could hardly raise three thousand heavy- 
armed soldiers, the number raised by Megara alone in the Persian 
War. Athens and Corinth alone maintained a respectable position 
as cities. These changes are partly accountable to economical 
causes, and were not beyond a remedy, had the moral feeling of the 
Greek people been correct and pure. " The historian traces this 
decay to a taste for luxury and ostentation; but this could only 
apply to the wealthy, and is by no means adequate. The real cause 
struck deeper, and was much more widely spread," the indifference 
to family life, the refusal to rear children. " Described in general 
terms, it was a want of reverence for the order of nature, for the 
natural revelations of the will of God ; and the sanction of infanticide 
was by no means the most destructive or the most loathsome form 
in which it manifested itself. This was the cancer which had been 
for many generations eating into the life of Greece." l So also the 
Greeks in Asia and Egypt, like their rulers, lived generally in defiance 
of all moral restraints. The history of the kings of Egypt and of 
Syria is, with few exceptions, one of the most disgusting and degrad- 
ing on record. The conquest of Asia and the East by Rome began 
the moral clearance of Greek Asiatic society. The history of Greece, 
after Alexander, is dismissed with contempt by its great historian 
Grote, who, referring to the Achaean League, remarks : "With this 
after-growth, or half-revival, I shall not meddle. It forms the Greece 
of Polybius, which that author, in my opinion, treats justly, as having 
no history of its own, but as an appendage attached to some foreign 
centre and principal among its neighbours, Macedonia, Egypt, Syria, 
Rome. Each of these neighbours acted upon the destinies of Greece 
more powerfully than the Greeks themselves. The Greeks .... 
present, as their most marked characteristic, a loose aggregation of 
autonomous tribes, or communities, acting and reacting freely among 
themselves,, with little or no pressure from foreigners. The main 
history of the narrative has consisted in the spontaneous grouping of 
the different Hellenic factions, in the self-prompted co-operation, the 
abortive attempts to bring about something like an effective federal 
organisation ; or to maintain two permanent rival confederacies ; the 
energetic ambitions and endurance of men to whom Hellas was the 
'entire political world. The freedom of Hellas, the life and soul of 
this history from its commencement, disappeared completely during 

1 Thirhvall, " History of Greece," pp. 460-465. 



104 From the Em P ire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

the first years of Alexander's reign." 1 Another able writer deals in 
censures, which must be taken with some qualification : " Especially 
great appear the Romans and the Italians .... their military 
rudeness shows in the most advantageous light when we compare it 
with the base and grovelling temper of the Greeks, with their enmities 
and envies amongst one another, and their readiness to sell friends 
and country to the highest bidder, or to offer them up to their petty- 
passions and grovelling desires." 2 

4. Rome was rapidly advancing towards the conquest of Italy, 
south of the Rubicon. The Gallic irruption, and the taking of 
Rome by the Gauls, after the battle of Allia 389 B.C., was but a 
temporary check, and the calamity excited little interest beyond the 
confines of Italy. So infrequent was the intercourse of nations that 
the news of the capture reached Athens in the form of a story, that 
an army of hyperboreans had taken a Greek city called Rome, 
situated near the Great Sea. By the year 346 B.C. the Gauls had 
been either driven from Italy or destroyed. Then followed the First 
Samnite War 342-340 B.C. ; then the Latin War 339-337 B.C. ; then 
the Second Samnite War 325-304 B.C., and a third 298-290 B.C. ; 
after which, to the disgrace of the Romans, the brave and magnani- 
mous Pontius of Telesina, the Samnite general and patriot, was 
brutally put to death, after being led in chains in the triumphal 
march of the conqueror in Rome. After this the Etruscans, with 
the Boii and Senones bordering on Gallia Cisalpina, were reduced, 
280 B.C. Another enemy, Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, connected with 
the family of Alexander the Great, was stimulated to emulate his 
career, and to carve out for himself an empire in Italy and Sicily. 
Invited by the Tarentines and aided by the general sympathy of the 
Greeks of southern Italy, the war continued from 282 B.C. to 272 B.C., 
after which Pyrrhus left for Sicily, and soon after was killed at Argos in 
Greece. All Italy (not including Gallia Cisalpina) was now subject to 
Rome, 266 B.C. Some of the Italian nations had already been admitted 
to all the privileges of Roman citizenship ; others, as allies or con- 
federates of Rome, retained their territorial rights, but were bound to 
furnish supplies of troops, money, and corn ; some of the subject states 
were severely dealt with and placed under great restriction. Single 
cities were either municipia, with right of Roman citizenship, or 
colonies settled by Roman citizens, to whom lands were assigned in the 
vicinity, or prefecture, which were municipia governed by a magistrate 

1 Grote, " History of Greece," I2mo. vol. xii. pp. 211-213. 
" History of Rome " (Cab. Encyc. vol. i. p. 247). 



to the Christian Era. 105 

sent annually from Rome. The extension of the Roman territory 
to the Alps by the conquest of the Gauls in north Italy was nearly 
completed when the First Punic War with Carthage commenced, 
264 B.C. "The ten years preceding the First Punic War were pro- 
bably a time of the greatest physical prosperity which the mass of 
the Roman people ever knew. Within twenty years two agrarian 
laws had been passed on a most extensive scale, and the poorer 
citizens had received besides what may be called a large dividend in 
money out of the lands which the state had conquered. In addition 
to this, the farming of the state domains, or of their produce, 
furnished those who had money with abundant opportunities of 

profitable adventure No wonder, then, that war was at this 

time popular But our 'pleasant vices' are ever made 

instruments to scourge us ; and the First Punic War, into which the 
Roman people forced the senate to enter, not only in its long course 
bore most heavily upon the poorer citizens, but, from the feelings of 
enmity which it excited in the breast of Hamilcar, led most surely to 
that fearful visitation of Hannibal's sixteen years' invasion of Italy, 
which destroyed for ever, not indeed the pride of the Roman 
dominion, but the well-being of the Roman people " l . . . . " Be- 
ginning her career of conquest beyond the limits of Italy, Rome 
was now entering upon her appointed work, and that work was 
undoubtedly fraught with good." 2 But the occasion of the First 
Punic War was dishonourable to Rome. Certain mercenary soldiers 
had seized Messana in Sicily, destroyed the citizens, and held 
possession against the Syracusans, 284 B.C. They were beaten in 
the field and blockaded in Messana by Hiero, king of Syracuse, and 
then, driven to extremity, sent a deputation to Rome, praying that 
" the Romans, the sovereigns of Italy, would not suffer an Italian 
people to be destroyed by Greeks and Carthaginians," 264 B.C. It 
was singular that such a request should be made to the Romans, 
who only six years before had chastised the military revolt of their 
brethren Mamertines in Rhegium, taking the city by storm, scourging 
and beheading the defenders, and then restoring the old inhabitants 
(270 B.C.). The senate was opposed to the request of the Messana 
deputation; but the consuls and the people of Rome, already 
jealous of Carthaginian influence in Sicily and the Mediterranean,, 
resolved to protect the Mamertime buccaneers and to receive them 
as their friends and allies. Thus dishonestly and disgracefully did 
the Romans depart from their purely Italian and continental policy, 

1 Arnold, " History of Rome," vol. ii. pp. 538-540. 2 Ibid., p. 545. 



106 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

which had so well succeeded, to enter upon another system, the 
results of which no one then could foresee. Some excuse may be 
found in the fact that the Carthaginians had been placed. by their 
partisans in Messana in possession of the citadel, and this great rival 
power of Carthage was thus brought unpleasantly near to the recent 
conquered territory of Rome. The fear of Carthaginian influence 
overcame the natural reluctance to an alliance with traitors false to 
their military oath, the murderers and plunderers of a city which they 
were bound to protect. Thus began " the First Punic War, which 
lasted, without intermission, twenty-two years, a longer space of time 
than the whole period occupied by the wars of the French Revo- 
lution." x In this war Duilius won the first naval battle near Mylae 
(Melarro). Regulus invaded Africa proper, the territory of 
Carthage, with great success, until beaten and taken prisoner at 
Zama, 256-255 B.C. The war was carried on in Sicily and on the sea 
until 241 B.C., when peace was made on conditions that the Cartha- 
ginians should evacuate Sicily and make no war upon Hiero, king of 
Sicily (the ally of the Romans), that they should pay 3200 Euboic 
talents (about i 10,000) within ten years, 241 B.C. The effects of 
an exhausting war were soon overcome by ancient nations, so that 
both Rome and Carthage rapidly recovered, " because wars in those 
days were not maintained at the expense of posterity." 2 Rome had 
to check the Illyrian pirates and to complete the conquest of 
Cisalpine Gaul and the Ligurians 238-221 B.C. Meanwhile the 
Carthaginians, hampered by a three years' rebellion of its mercenary 
troops, quietly permitted the Romans to take possession of Corsica 
and Sardinia, and agreed to pay 1200 talents as compensation to 
Roman merchants. On the other hand, measures were in process to 
re-establish the Carthaginian power ; the patriotic party, the Barcine 
family, under Hamilcar, commenced the carrying out of the 
extensions and consolidations of the territories in Spain. Hasdrubal, 
his son-in-law, continued the same policy by wars and alliances until 
the Romans, naturally jealous, were pacified by the engagement of 
the Carthaginians not to extend their conquest to the north of the 
Ebro, thus securing the people of Massalia (Roman allies), and 
keeping the Carthaginians at a safe distance from Italy. Saguntum, 
an independent city, originally a Greek colony, was, by this treaty, 
not to be molested by the Carthaginians, but Hannibal, the son of 
Hamilcar, who succeeded Hasdrubal, besieged and took Saguntum 
after a siege of eight months, 219 B.C. (ostensibly in defence of a 

1 Dr. Arnold, " History of Rome," vol. ii. p. 561. " Ibid., vol. iii. p. 24. 



to the Christian Era. 107 

Spanish tribe). Upon this, war was declared by the Romans 218 
B.C., and then the Second Punic War began, which lasted nearly 
eighteen years, "the most memorable of all that were ever waged," 
in the opinion of Livy. It will be ever remembered for the remark- 
able campaign by which Hannibal entered Italy from Spain, through 
Gaul across the Alps, and kept his army there for sixteen years ; 
and also for the equally remarkable steady pertinacity of the opposi- 
tion offered by Rome. The route taken by Hannibal was by the 
Pyrenees, through southern Gaul by Narbonne and Nimes to the 
Rhone, about two days' march above Avignon, then through the 
country of the Allobroges, through Chamberry, and by the Pass of the 
Little St. Bernard (or Mont Cenis) to Ivrea in Italy. The battles 
of the Ticinus and Trebia made Hannibal master of all northern 
Italy, 218 B.C., after which his victories on the Lake Thrasymenus, 
217 B.C., and at Cannae, 216 B.C., caused all the nations of central 
and southern Italy to throw off the Roman yoke, with the exception 
of the Latins and a few isolated cities. But by 215 B.C. Hannibal's 
career of successes terminated ; he received little help from Carthage, 
and none from his ally, Philip III. of Macedon. The Romans 
carried the war into Spain, to cut off all help from that quarter, and 
at last into Africa. Scipio defeated the Carthaginians (commanded 
by Hannibal, who had been recalled from Italy) at Zama, 202 B.C., 
and peace was concluded, by which the Carthaginians gave up all 
their ships of war (except ten) and their elephants, and agreed to pay 
10,000 talents within fifty years. The African ally of the Romans, 
Masinissa, received the two Numidias, and thus Carthage was placed 
defenceless under the power of Rome. " The immediate results of 
the war were the conversion of Spain into two Roman provinces ; the 
union of the hitherto dependent kingdom of Syracuse with the 
Roman province of Sicily ; the establishment of a Roman instead 
of the Carthaginian protectorate over the most important Numidian 
chiefs ; and, lastly, the conversion of Carthage from a powerful 
commercial state into a defenceless mercantile town. Moreover, it 
brought about that decided contact between the state systems of the 
East and the West which the First Punic War had only foreshadowed, 
and thereby gave rise to the closely impending decisive interference 
of Rome in the conflicts of the Alexandrian monarchies." * In this 
war one fourth of the citizens of Rome had fallen, and three hundred 
thousand Italians ; four hundred towns destroyed. The senate of 
Rome required a nomination of one hundred and seventy-seven persons 

1 " Mommsen, " vol. ii. pp. 189, 190. -. 



io8 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

to make up its number. The distressed country population became 
demoralised ; robber bands multiplied, so that in Apulia alone seven 
hundred men in one year had to be condemned for robbery. 

5. There is but one opinion as to the beneficial character of the 
results of the triumph of Rome, although " no single Roman will 
bear comparison with Hannibal." .... "It was clearly for the 
good of mankind that Hannibal should be conquered ; his triumph 

would have stopped the progress of the world He who 

grieves over the battle of Zama should carry on his thoughts .... 
and consider how the isolated Phoenician city of Carthage was fitted 
to receive and to consolidate the civilisation of Greece, or by its 
laws and institutions to bind together barbarians of every race and 
language into an organised empire, and prepare them for becoming, 
when that empire was dissolved, the free members of the common- 
wealth of Christian Europe." * And again, " If under the conditions 
of ancient society, and the savagery of the warfare which it 
tolerated, there was an unavoidable necessity for either Rome or 
Carthage to perish utterly, we must admit, in spite of the sympathy 
which the brilliancy of the Carthaginian civilisation, the heroism of 
Hamilcar and Hannibal, and the tragic catastrophe itself call forth, 
that it was well for the human race that the blow fell on Carthage 
rather than on Rome. A universal Carthaginian empire could have 
done for the world, as far as we can see, nothing comparable 
to that which the Roman universal empire did for it. It would not 
have melted down national antipathies ; it would not have given a 
common literature or language ; it would not have prepared the way 
for a higher civilisation and an infinite purer religion. Still less 
would it have built up that majestic fabric of law which forms the 
basis of the legislation of all the states of modern Europe and 
America." 2 " We look in vain for any legacy left by the Phoenicians 
(Carthage) to the world except the development of peaceful trade ; 
they taught the world no politics, no religion or arts. They have 
left us no orators, no poets, no historians ; and yet it may be that in 
this they have only suffered the fate of vanquished nations. Who 
knows but that, had they defeated the Romans, they might have 
perpetuated a literature equal to that of the Hebrews ? But, still, 
they could never have replaced the Greeks in politics, in the arts, 
and in the general power of assimilating other nations to themselves 
.... for this reason, they were swept away as soon as they had 

1 Arnold, " History of Rome," vol. iii. p. 65. 

2 Bosworth-Smith, " Rome and Carthage," pp. 21, 22. 



to tJie Christian Era. 109 

done their work." * These opinions will meet with the approval of 
most thoughtful men; but the necessity for the destruction of 
Carthage itself is quite another question. The Roman power was 
not affected in after-ages by the wealth and trade of the new 
Carthage on the old site, or of Alexandria. One great evil is 
obvious ; there was no rival left to exercise a moderating influence 
on the ambition and covetousness of the governing class at Rome ; 
hence resulted the rapid corruption of public and social life ; the 
dissolution of the old Roman manners, and the equally rapid 
extinction of the old Roman population in Rome and in Italy, 
supplanted by the enormous addition made to the slave population 
after the Second Punic War. Free labour and slavery cannot exist 
together; hence the brave old warlike farmers, the civic and the agricul- 
tural free labouring population had ceased to exist in the first century 
before the Christian era. Rome itself became a city, peopled by 
the refuse of the conquered nationalities. This deterioration of 
manners and race may be dated from the return of the army of 
Manlius from Asia, about 187 B.C. 

6. Three wars with Philip III. of Macedon followed, 214-204 
B.C., again 200-197 B.C. After the second war, which gave the 
Romans the predominance in Greece, by the taking from Philip the 
hegemony of the Greek states, a war with Antiochus III., the Great, 
of Syria, followed, 192-190 B.C. This monarch, offended by 
the interference of the Romans in declaring the Greeks of Asia 
" free and independent," endeavoured to form an alliance with Mace- 
donia and the Greek states against Rome. The ^Etolians were his 
allies ; Macedon and the Achaeans remained firm to the Romans. 
Antiochus was defeated at Thermopylae, in Greece, and, followed by 
the Romans into Asia, was again defeated at Magnesia, and com- 
pelled to pay fifteen thousand talents, to deliver up his fleet and ele- 
phants, and to abandon all Asia Minor west of the Taurus. Eumenes, 
king of Pergamus, and the Rhodians, the allies of the Romans, 
were rewarded by additions of territory. On the death of Philip III. 
Perseus, his son, began the Third War with Rome, 171-168 B.C., 
which ended in the battle of Pydna, and the subjection of Mace- 
donia, Illyria, and Epirus. In Epirus seventy cities were sacked in 
one day, and one hundred and fifty thousand of the inhabitants sold 
into slavery. One thousand of the leading Achaeans, suspected of 
attachment to Macedonian rule, were sent to Rome and detained 
there seventeen years. Assisted by a revolt in Macedonia, the 

1 Mahafly on " Primitive Civilization," p. 174. 



no From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

Achseans again opposed the Romans ; they were defeated and con- 
quered by Mummius, the consul, who sacked and burnt Corinth, 
and thus the whole of Greece with Macedonia became Roman 
provinces 146 B.C. The same year what is called the Third Punic 
War was ended. This really was merely the carrying out the 
determination of Rome to destroy the city of Carthage. After two 
years' resistance Carthage was taken and levelled to the ground 
146 B.C. The wars with Macedonia prevented the possibility of a 
consolidation of Greek power under Macedon, which might have 
preserved Greek nationality. With the destruction of Carthage there 
was no rival power left to excite the few, or check the ambition, of 
the leaders of the Roman oligarchy. In Spain alone, among .the 
Celtiberians and Numantians of the North, there was resistance, 
which terminated in the taking of Numantia after a siege of 
fifteen months, 133 B.C. Roman conquest was not interrupted by 
the dissensions of the Roman factions, or by insurrection of the 
slaves, or of the Italian allies. In three wars with Mithridates, 
king of Pontus, 88-84, 83, 74-63 B.C., the Roman power in Asia 
was sustained arid firmly established. In Africa the Jugurthan 
war, 111-105 B^C., ended with the capture of Jugurtha, and placed 
all north Africa under Roman rule. Transalpine Gaul was formed 
into the Roman "provincia" 123 B.C. Syria and Armenia became 
Roman provinces 64 B.C. Gaul was conquered by Julius C?esar 58-49 
B.C., and Egypt ceased to be a united kingdom after the battle of 
Actium, 30 B.C. The history of these conquests cannot be given in 
detail ; that of Gaul is the most important. "The Kelts in every fea- 
ture resemble their Irish descendants brave, poetical, amiable, clever, 
but, in a political point of view, a thoroughly useless nation." * ' In 
the opinion of Mommsen, the Gauls were incapable of resisting the 
Germans, and that Caesar, by his repulse of Ariovistus, the German, 
postponed the occupation of the west of Europe by the barbarians 
four centuries. " That there is a bridge connecting the past history 
and glory of Hellas and Rome with the prouder fabric of modern 
history ; that western Europe is Romaic, and that Germanic 
Europe is classic ; that the names of Themistocles and Scipio have 
to us a very different sound from those of Azoka and Salmanazzar ; 
that Homer and Euripides are not merely like the Vedas and 
Kalidasa, attractions to the literary botanist, but flower for us in our 
own garden all this is the work of Caesar." 2 "In the mighty 
vortex of the world's history, which inevitably crushes all people that 
are not as hard and as flexible as steel, such a nation (the Kelts) 
1 Mommsen, vol. iv. p. 287. * Ibid., vol. iv. pp. 285-289. 






to the Christian Era. 1 1 1 

could not permanently maintain itself. With reason the Kelts of 
the continent suffered the same fate at the hands of the Romans as 
their kinsmen in Ireland suffer down to our day at the hands ot 
the Saxons the fate of becoming merged as a leaven of future 
development in a political superior nationality/' 1 But, leaving 
these doubtful speculations, tinged with some national prejudice, it 
is necessary to turn to the struggles and dissensions of the city of 
Rome, the attempts at reform, and their failures, which prepared the 
way for the extinction of the Republic. 

7. The internal history of the Roman people reveals to us two great 
struggles : that for equality of civil and social position between the 
populus (the old aristocratic patricians, the original people, at one 
time the only people) and the plebeians, the free inhabitants (as dis- 
tinguished from the clients, who were dependants upon the great 
patrician families). But before 174 B.C. this struggle had ended. 
Even the office of pontifex maximus had been granted to a plebeian, 
300 B.C., and the populus now comprehended the entire free popu- 
lation, all of whom were eligible to the highest offices. A new order 
of nobility arose, the nobiles or optimates, consisting of persons whose 
ancestors had filled curule offices (who had passed the chair), such 
as the sedileship, prastorship, or consulate. None but the richest 
families could belong to this order, as the first step to office, the 
sedileship, was burdened (since the First Punic War) with the cost of 
the public shows and games. The equestrian dignity was also in the 
hands of the rich, having no longer any connexion with the cavalry 
service, but with the amount of property held. The rest of the popu- 
lation were termed ignobiles and obscuri, and their members homines 
novi. The other struggle was respecting an agrarian law to regulate 
the appropriation and use of the public lands the ager publicus. 
This land was at first occupied by the patrician " populus," as lease- 
holders under the state, claiming also an exclusive right as a class 
to the enjoyment of such leases, which, in fact, were the main sources 
of the wealth and power of their order. The claims of the plebeians 
to a share in this monopoly led to the agitation for an agrarian law. 
The nature of this law was not understood by historians before the time 
of Heyne (1793) followed by Niebuhr and Savigny. It had no refer- 
ence to private property in land, but related solely to the public lands. 
The object of the proposers of these laws was to limit the extent of 
the public lands held by individuals, and to appropriate portions 
among the poorer citizens of Rome. These, and the smaller pro- 
prietors around Rome, had, in the preceding generation, to fill the 

1 Mommsen, vol. iv. p. 285. 



H2 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

armies, and to furnish the means for their own personal equipment, 
while carrying on the annual campaigns in the wars in Italy. To meet 
these burdens, they had been, and were yet, compelled to borrow 
largely of the moneyed class, and were legally liable to be sold with 
their families, as slaves, to meet the claims of their creditors. Hence 
the occasional interference of the state with the claims of the creditors, 
sometimes by lowering the amounts due, or by erasing the debts. 
But these temporary expedients could not save the then poor citizen 
farmers from ruin. Patriotic, far-seeing men saw in the alteration of 
the land laws the most probable means of permanent relief. Spurius 
Cassius, 486-458 B.C., had begun the contest, and the temporary 
secessions of the people from Rome, 492 B.C., 448 B.C., 395 B.C., 
had proved the intense feeling of a large party in this question. The 
Licinian Laws, 375-362 B.C., the Publilian Laws, 339 B.C., aimed to 
limit the holding of the public land to 500 jugera (from 280 to 300 
English acres), and to assign portions, varying from 2 to 14 jugera, 
to the poorer citizens. These 500 jugera, all arable land, formed no 
paltry farm, considering the right of pasturage on the outlying lands, 
for 100 large, or 500 small cattle, the fertility of the soil, and the 
frugal habits of the people. Such a farm is regarded as a handsome 
property in the Roman territory in the present day. 1 Each attempt 
of the patriotic advocates of these laws was followed by some advan- 
tage to the people, but the laws were evaded or revoked, as oppor- 
tunity offered ; and the evil of the decrease of tillage, through the 
enlargement of pasturage and the employment of slaves to the 
exclusion of free labourers and free proprietors, went on increasing 
day by day. This state of affairs alarmed Tiberius Gracchus, when 
brought to his notice in his journey through Tuscany to join the 
Roman army before Numantia, in Spain, 137 B.C. He saw large 
domains covered with droves of cattle tended by mounted shepherds, 
while swine were running wild in the forest miles and miles of land 
abandoned to the boar and the buffalo. Here and there a solitary 
herdsman might be seen with his staff or his pike to defend himself 
against the wolves and wild boars. And these few inhabitants were 
generally barbarians (Thracians, Iberians, or Africans), ignorant of 
the language of Rome. This monopoly of land (latifundia) natur- 
ally led to another evil (proletariat the crowded beggar population 
of large towns, especially of Rome. To understand the nature of 
the social and political problems connected with these words is, to 
all of us, a matter of importance. These explain the decline of the 

1 Niebuhr in Foreign Quarterly, No. xxxiii. 



to tJie Christian Era. 113 

Roman Empire. They discover to us the nature of that cankerworm 
which is stealthily, but steadily and continuously, impairing the 
vitality of our modern civilisation. Tiberius Gracchus, first of all, 
137-133 B.C., and next, Caius Gracchus, his brother, 124-121 B.C., 
after carrying a series of enactments to remedy these evils, fell a 
sacrifice to the fears and the revenge of the opponents of the agrarian 
laws. The regulations in favour of small grants to the poorer citizens 
were neutralised by the permission given to the recipients to sell 
these lands. From 139 B.C. to 123 B.C. the ballot was used in 
all cases where votes were taken. But from that time bribery was 
used to such an extent that voting became a profitable and easy 
trade, and special agencies arose for managing elections and evading 
the law. A tribune, Bonus (119 B.C.), carried a law against the 
future division of the public lands, with a provision that the rents 
should form a fund for the relief of the poor. This poor law was 
repealed, so far as the tax was concerned, in B.C.; and thus, by the 
persevering scheming of the oligarchic faction, the poorer classes 
lost both land and the poor money. Great was the party violence in 
these contests. When Tiberius Gracchus was killed, three hundred 
persons fell with him ; and when his brother, Caius Gracchus, fell, 
three thousand persons were killed in the streets, or strangled in 
prison. On the question of the policy of the Gracchi there is, 
great difference of opinion just as in England, on the Reform Bill 
of 1832. Mommsen (the German historian) appears to approve,, 
on the whole, the policy of the Gracchi, but complains of the 
irregularity of the procedure, as if it were possible to carry out 
reforms affecting powerful interests without a great departure from 
ordinary routine. In such cases the spirit of the constitution, 
rather than the letter is to be considered. That such measures above 
law are dangerous, no one doubts, and they are only justifiable 
when absolute necessity requires prompt and extreme remedy. The 
evils which result as the consequence of such irregular action lie at 
the door of those who obstinately oppose the necessary reforms. 
Mommsen thinks that, as Rome was governed by a senate, it was 
contrary to the spirit of the constitution when Tiberius Gracchus sub- 
mitted the domain question to the people, and when he uncon- 
stitutionally deposed his tribunal colleagues that the burgess 
assemblies in the comitia had become mere mobs, and that the 
comitia itself had also become a mere meeting (a contio), such as was 
called to consider, but not to decide, and that by such contiones 
practically the decrees were passed, each contio thus decreeing 
itself lands out of the public purse. These contiones had no 

i 



H4 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

legal significance, " practically they ruled the street, and, already, the 
opinion of the street was a power in Rome." Scipio ^milianus knew 
the composition of improvised contiones, when, in 133 B.C., he 
said, in a speech to the populace, "Ye, to whom Italy is not mother, 
but step-mother, ought to keep silence ; surely ye do not think that 
I will fear those let loose whom I sent in chains to the slave-market." 
In Mommsen's opinion, " when any one, whom circumstances and his 
own influence with the proletariate enabled to command the streets for 
a few hours, found it possible to impress on his projects the stamp of 
the sovereign people's will, Rome had reached, not the beginning, 
but the end, of popular freedom had arrived, not at democracy, but 
at monarchy." And yet, again, he makes admissions which tell against 
his objections : " The aristocratic government was so thoroughly per- 
nicious, that a citizen who was able to depose the senate, and to put 
himself in its room, would, perhaps, have benefited the common- 
wealth more than he injured it." 1 A. H. Beesley 2 takes a decidedly 
favourable view. He thinks that Tiberius Gracchus was guilty of 
beginning a revolution in Rome, in the sense that a man is guilty 
who introduces a light into some chamber filled with explosive 
vapour, which the stupidity or malice of others had suffered to 
accumulate. : The effects of the reactionary legislation after the death 
of Caius Gracchus is described as follows : " Slave labour, and 
slave discontent, latifundia, decrease of population, depreciation of the 
land, received a fresh impetus, and the triumphant optimates pushed 
the state step by step further down the road to ruin .... Ten years 
after the passing of the Bsebian law it was said that among all the citi- 
zens there were only two thousand wealthy families .... The death of 
Caius prolonged the senate's misrule for twenty years : twenty years 
of shame, at home and abroad .... before those who had drawn 
the sword against the Gracchi perished by the sword of Marius im- 
potent, unpitied, and despised." 3 The greatest of all evils resulting 
from the legislation of Caius Gracchus was the legalising abuses 
connected with the right of all citizens in Rome to purchase grain 
from the public stores at a low price, the loss being borne by 
the state. Fifty years later the quantity sold to each was limited to 
the 40,000 purchasers. Clodius (the demagogue, the enemy of 
Cicero) enacted that i \ bushel per month should be given without 
payment. There were soon 320,000 claimants. These Julius Csesar 
reduced to 150,000, and Augustus fixed the number at 200,000. 
., ..^.. 

1 Mommsen, vol. iii. pp. 97-100. 

2 In the " Gracchi," &c. " Epochs of History." 3 Ibid., pp. 30, 6l, 62. 



to the Christian Era. 1 1 5 

Various attempts were made to remedy the evils resulting from the fail- 
ure of the agrarian reform, and in after-ages the settlement of colonies, 
in order to provide for disbanded soldiers and others, displayed the 
consciousness of the existence of a growing evil rather than the best 
means for its alleviation. The lands of Italy were depopulated, the 
mongrel degraded mob of Rome, fed by largesses of corn from the 
tributes of Sicily, Africa, and Egypt, had no wish to lead a life of 
labour as farmers, distant from the amusements and comforts of 
Rome, their sole desire "panem et circenses." And so affairs con- 
tinued for more than four centuries, when " the (barbarian) flood 
came and destroyed them all " (Luke xvii. 26). There were other 
dark spots in the victorious picture of Roman progress, which should 
be made more prominent in the histories of Roman prosperity. 
Three Slave wars in Italy and Sicily (134-132) (103-401), the 
last of which (73-71) was a war with revolted gladiators. Add 
to these the extensive piracy carried on in the Mediterranean, for the 
extinction of which large powers were granted to Pompey, by whom 
the pirates were effectually quelled 67 B.C. The Roman world, and 
Rome itself, had to pay dearly for the benefits connected with the 
rule of Rome. 

8. The invasion of the Cimbri (perhaps a mixed race of Kelts and 
Teutons) was repelled by the consul Marius, both in Gaul and in 
North Italy, 103-101 B.C. About 320,000 men are supposed to 
have been slain in this conflict. The Social or Marsic War on the 
part of a large number of the Italian allies, who demanded the full 
franchise, continued three years, 90-88 B.C. Full 300,000 lives were 
lost in this contest. When the war was over, the Romans wisely 
granted them the franchise. Eight or ten tribes were added to the 
thirty-five already existing. The new citizens had to appear in person 
at Rome to give their votes in the polling booths. " The enrolment of 
the Italians among her own citizens deserves to be regarded as the 
gravest stroke of policy in the whole history of the republic .... 
Doubtless it helped in some measure to accelerate the destruction 
of the old national sentiments. But these were already mortally 
stricken, and were destined quickly to perish in the general corruption 
of society. It reduced the legions more directly to instruments of 
their generals' personal ambition ; but the strongest check to that fatal 
tendency had been already removed by the enlistment of the lower 
classes of Rome by Marius, and these the necessities of the state 
... had both justified and approved .... It undermined the 
despotic rule of the oligarchy." l This measure, whether deemed 
1 Merivale, "Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 98. 
I 2 



u6 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

wise or the contrary by the historians, was a necessity which could not 
be avoided. It might have led to the re-establishment and perpetuity 
of the republic had the people and leaders of Rome understood the 
practicability of representing the scattered and distant, as well as 
those near and on the spot, by the election of delegates (as in modern 
times). A parliament of representatives of the Italian states, working 
in connexion with the senate, might have altered, not only the history 
of Rome, but the history of the world. As it was, the extension of 
the franchise did no harm to the republic, which had virtually ceased 
to exist. The history of Rome from this time is one of personal 
struggles for power. It becomes a mere biography of Marius, of Sylla, 
of Pompey and Caesar, of Marc Antony and Octavius Caesar, mingled 
with notices of Catiline and Cicero, Brutus and Cato. In the 
interests of humanity, the vast provinces governed and plundered by 
the nominees of the Roman oligarchy required some change by 
which the extortion and the tyranny of these oppressors might be 
controlled. The provinces longed for the rule of one over Rome 
itself and over them. 

9. MARIUS, the son of a day labourer, rose from the ranks, was 
patronised by Scipio at Numantia, and, by his marriage with the 
aunt of Julius Caesar, was placed in a position to aspire to the 
honours of the state. His bravery and energy, accompanied by 
coarseness of taste and habits, contrasted with those of his rival 
Sylla, the noble, literary, but debauched leader of the oligarchy, a 
man brave but cruel, of whom it is said that " no act of kindness or 
generosity is recorded of him." At the end of the Social War, Sylla, 
the consul 88 B.C., obtained the command of the army against 
Mithridates, This was opposed by the partisans of Marius, who, in 
Sylla's absence, nominated Marius to the command against that 
sovereign in the place of Sylla. Sylla, who had not left Italy, at 
once returned to Rome with part of his army, and Marius had to 
fly from Rome. Since Marius (107 B.C.) had enrolled as soldiers 
the rabble of the forum, men without property, and thus created a 
mere mercenary body of soldiers in lieu of the old citizen troops, 
the Roman armies became not so much the forces of the state as ol 
the general who commanded them. These popular, brave, daring, 
and fortunate generals became practically the rulers of the common- 
wealth. Sylla having left for Asia with his army, Marius returned 
to Rome, favoured by the consul Cinna, 87 B.C. Then began a 
merciless slaughter of opponents for five days and nights without 
interruption, and after this there were daily executions for four 
months in Rome and in all Italy. " The sympathies of Marius lay 



to the Christian Era. 1 1 7 

wholly with the best element which was left among the inhabitants 
of Italy. The villager of Arpinum, whose grandfather had not been 
a full citizen, felt with the remnant of the old rural plebeians ; still 
more strongly, perhaps, did he feel with the unenfranchised allies. 
If the daring plebeian bearded the nobles to their faces, the stout 
yeoman looked with no favour on the law which distributed corn 
among the idle populace of the city." 1 Marius was, no doubt, mad, 
and his death early in 86 B.C. was a relief to his party. Cinna died 
84 B.C. On Sylla's return, 83 B.C., the younger Marius, assisted by 
the Samnites, nearly took Rome, but were defeated at the Colline 
Gate, November i. The city had never been in such peril since the 
conquest by the Gauls. This placed Sylla in possession of Rome 
and of the supreme power. Then began the work of vengeance. 
Next day from three to eight thousand prisoners were massacred : 
then twelve thousand prisoners captured at Praeneste were slain (with 
the exception of the Romans and the women and children) ; the 
body of Marius was torn from its grave and thrown into the Arno ; 
about two hundred senators and two or three thousand of the 
equites were put to death, besides thousands of the common 
people in Rome and also numbers in the cities of Italy. Etruria 
was so thoroughly ravaged, everywhere the old population perished, 
and the language lost ; in all Italy cities were dismantled, the 
Samnite people annihilated, and the confiscated lands divided 
among 120,000 of Sylla's soldiers. Sylla was appointed dictator 
for an indefinite period, empowered to re-form and re-construct the 
commonwealth. Sylla is one of the most marvellous characters in 
history. Beesley thinks that, when Sylla saw Marius "gradually 
floundering into villany, he more than felt the serene superiority of 
a natural genius for vice." 2 He was luxurious, licentious, a scoffer, 
and yet superstitious, cynical, contemptuous of public opinion, 
without confidence in human nature, and yet without fear. All his 
legislation had for its object the revival of the old constitution and 
the old restrictions, although most of the old families had already 
perished. " Ten years sufficed to overthrow the whole structure of 
this reactionary legislation." In the year 79 B.C. Sylla, after killing 
fifteen consulars, ninety senators, two thousand six hundred knights, 
and one hundred thousand Romans and Italians, and confiscating 
their goods, resigned his power, in the market-place of Rome, and 
returned to his dwelling fearless and unhurt ; he amused himself 
with literature and in writing the memoirs of his own life, until his 

1 Freeman, " Essays, "second series, p. 281. 2 The Gracchi, p. 80. 



Ii8 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

sudden death 78 B.C., aged sixty. "Stained with the blood of so 
many thousand victims, and tormented with a loathsome disease, he 
quitted the world without a symptom either of remorse or repining." 1 
His character has been studied by historians who have no sympathy 
with his crimes or his vices. "The cold-blooded politic massacres 
of Sylla seems to us to imply a looser moral state than the ferocious 
revenge of Marius, or even than the bloody madness of Caius or 
Nero. That such a man should have done such deeds puts human 
nature in a far more fearful light than it is put by the frantic crimes 
of silly youths whose heads were turned by the possession of abso- 
lute power His crimes were greater in degree than those 

either of Caesar or Buonaparte .... but he had an object before 
him which was not wholly selfish ; he was above the vulgar ambition 
of becoming a king and the father of kings .... he had not 
been working and sinning only for his own gains or his own vanity ; 
there was a kind of patriotism in the man, perverted and horrible as 
was the form which it took." 2 

10. After the gladiatorial rebellion, which was put down at last by 
Pompey 71 B.C. (a partisan of Sylla), a man cultivated and moral, 
" but destitute of the real generosity which makes and retains 
friends" . . . . " feared by all, admired by some, trusted by few, and 
loved by none," 3 he became one of the leading men of Rome. 
Crassus, the great capitalist, was another. Caius Julius Caesar was 
the third. Julius Caesar, of high patrician descent, yet connected 
by marriage with Marius and Cinna, looked upon himself as the 
heir of their policy in its better aspects; reckless, lavish, and 
licentious, but literary and cultivated, " he was saved from being a 
monster of pride and selfishness by no moral principle, but only by 
the geniality of his temper and the kindness of his disposition."* 
Pompey and Crassus obtained the consulship B.C. 70. In 67 B.C. 
Pompey was intrusted with extraordinary powers, by which he was 
able to put down the formidable piracies which had made the 
navigation of the Mediterranean unsafe. Next year his party 
recalled Lucullus, who was engaged in the war with Mithridates, and 
Pompey was appointed his successor. After defeating Mithridates, 
he put an end to the monarchy of the Seleucidae in Syria, and 
extended the bounds of the Roman empire to the Euphrates, 
63 B.C. In the absence of Pompey, Julius Caesar, by degrees, 

1 Merivale, "Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 149. 

2 Freeman's " Essays," second series, pp. 282-287. 

3 Merivale, " Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 169. 4 Ibid., p. 185. 



to the Christian Era. 119 

allowed his opinions (which were not friendly to the oligarchic 
senate) to be known, and, by a large expenditure, kept up the 
attachment of the popular party in Rome. He was elected pontifex 
maximus, and, though deeply in debt, borrowed still more largely 
to insure his election. The conspiracy of Catiline, discovered and 
put down by the decision of the great orator Cicero, the consul for 
the year 63 B.C., ended with the death of Catiline in battle, 62 B.C. 
Caesar, after commanding in Spain, 61 B.C., became consul 59 B.C., 
by the help of Pompey, and at the expiration of his term of office 
obtained Cisalpine Gaul, and Gaul beyond the Alps, as his sphere 
of command, 58 B.C. This was the result of a tacit understanding 
between Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar, though as yet the triumvirate 
was not what it became at a later period, a regularly-appointed board 
for the administration of affairs. This first triumvirate was simply 
an understood compact by which the three parties bound themselves 
to advance the special objects of each other. The conception of 
this compact was due to the genius of Caesar alone, 56-61 B.C. The 
views of the three were different : Pompey and Crassus aimed at 
such an ascendancy as would make them independent of the senate 
and of the populace of the forum ; Caesar had other and less selfish 
views he saw that the city had become an empire, and that this 
empire could no longer be governed as a city or municipality for the 
benefit of the citizens. All the conquered peoples looked up to an 
autocracy. It was his ambition to be himself the man, and thus 
supply the want, the necessity of the empire. Such, no doubt, were 
the grounds by which he justified to himself his actions, and these 
have been too readily accepted by historians. "It was well for 
the world that a man of genius should arise at such a crisis to 
direct the general sentiment, and show how it could be realised." 1 
" Caesar's private means had been long exhausted ; the friends who 
had continued to supply his necessities had seemed to pour their 
treasures into a bottomless gulf; so vast was his expenditure in 
shows, canvasses, and bribes, so long and barren the career ot 
public service through which this ceaseless profusion had to be 
maintained. At this period, when the bold gamester was about to 
throw his last die, he could avow that he wanted two hundred and 
fifty million sesterces (above two millions sterling) to be worth 
nothing ! Before he could enter on the administration of his 
province he had pressing creditors to satisfy and expensive prepara- 
tions to make." 2 To this impediment of debt there was another, a 

1 Merivale, "Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 69. 2 Ibid., p. 252. 



120 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

decree of the senate to retain him at home. He borrowed of 
Crassus an amount equal to two hundred thousand pounds, and, 
once at the head of his troops, his foes would not dare to recall him. 
While Csesar was carrying on the wars which led to the conquest of 
Gaul, Crassus was killed in the Parthian campaign at Carrhae, 53 B.C. 
After this Pompey felt some jealousy of Cesar's military glory and 
popularity, and, yielding to the oligarchic party, did not oppose the 
recall of Csesar, while himself retained his office and power 50 B.C. 
Csesar without an army, and Pompey with his army, would have 
placed Caesar helpless at the mercy of his enemies in the senate. 
Csesar, conscious of his power and popularity, determined to assert 
his right to justice and equal consideration, crossed the Rubicon 
49 B.C., the legal boundary of Italy. A large party in Italy and in 
Rome sympathised with him. Italy was gained in sixty days. 
Pompey left for Greece. Caesar, having first defeated the Pompeians 
in Spain, followed Pompey into Greece 48 B.C. The Battle of 
Pharsalia and the subsequent flight and murder of Pompey in Egypt 
left Csesar the sole master of the (so-called) republic. Froude 
regards Pompey " as a weak, good man, whom accident had thrust 
into a place to which he was unequal ; and, ignorant of himself and 
unwilling to part with his imagined greatness, he was flung down 
with careless cruelty by the forces which were dividing the world." 1 
After settling the affairs of Egypt in favour of Cleopatra, and then 
defeating the successor of Mithridates in Asia Minor, Caesar returned 
to Rome, 47 B.C. After a brief stay there he proceeded to Africa, 
and defeated the Pompeians at Thapsus (of whom Scipio, Juba, and 
Cato committed suicide), and returned to Rome, 46 B.C. Again he 
departed for Spain, and defeated the Pompeian party in Spain at 
Munda, Varus, Labienus, and thirty thousand of their army killed 
in the battle. Cnseus Pompey fled, but soon afterwards was killed. 
Caesar again returned to Rome, 45 B.C., to celebrate his fifth triumph, 
and to carry on the reforms which he deemed necessary for the 
prosperity of the state. His measures were comprehensive and 
able : he revised the list of the recipients of corn, and reduced the 
number ; he extended the franchise of Roman citizenship to Cis- 
alpine Gaul, the Gallic legion, and all scientific men. To Trans- 
alpine Gaul he gave the Latin franchise. He restored the Roman 
senate, adding to it his friends, until it contained nine hundred 
members, many of whom were Gauls. The calendar was reformed ; 
military colonies established in the provinces, of which Corinth and 

1 "Life of Csesar." 






to the Christian Era. 12 1 

Carthage were the most important; and endeavours were made 
towards mitigating the hardships of slave life. He entertained grand 
and gigantic schemes of first crushing the Parthians, then returning 
across the Tanais and Borysthenes, subduing the northern barbarians, 
and finally attacking the Germans in the rear, but on the isth March, 
44 B.C., he was assassinated in the senate-house by Brutus, Cassius, 
Casca, Cimba, Trebonius, and others. This murder might be 
cynically described, in the language of a modern French statesman, 
not merely as a crime, but worse, as a mistake, and a most unfor- 
tunate one. To use the expression of Cicero, "the tyrant is dead, 
but the tyranny survives." It survived and was perpetuated, and 
was too often exercised by men who, as the successors of Caesar, 
were a disgrace to his name. Caesar was no traitor to the republic, 
which had, before his time, ceased to exist except in name. Nor 
was he unfaithful to his colleague Pompeius. It was Pompey, 
whose jealousy permitted the recall of Caesar to the position of a 
private citizen, while he himself had his army and retained all the 
authority of his position. Caesar was willing to give up his army 
provided his rival did the same. Armies had ceased to belong to 
the republic, they now belonged to their leaders. In the possession 
of supreme power Caesar honestly endeavoured to reform and recast 
the old regime, and to adapt it to the changed circumstances of the 
times. He had a heart, and never abandoned his friends as Pompey 
had done. " Whatever he undertook and achieved was penetrated 
and guided by the cool sobriety which constitutes the most marked 
peculiarity of his genius. To this he owed the power of living 
energetically in the present, undisturbed by recollection or expecta- 
tion Caesar was the entire and perfect man." 1 There are, 

however, other opinions of Caesar's character worthy of consideration. 
Dr. Thomas Arnold, in his " History of Rome," remarks : " If from 
the intellectual we turn to the moral character of Caesar, the whole 
range of history can hardly furnish a picture of greater deformity." 
In Froude's eyes he is a great political creator, a statesman with a 
single eye to justice and good government. 2 " Mommsen justifies 
the act of Caesar, in substituting his own rule for that of the senate, 
by precisely the same reasoning which he employs to justify the 
senate of an earlier period for superseding the rule of the people. 
In each case the usurpation was rendered legitimate by exclusive 
ability to govern." 3 Caesar has the advantage of being, on the 

1 Mommsen, vol. iv. pp. 451-457. - Quarterly Review, No. cxlviii. p. 68. 
3 Edinburgh Review i No. cl. p. 512. 



122 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

whole, better as a master than any of his competitors for power ; 
but neither he nor they can be justified, much less do they deserve 
eulogy. His death was followed by fourteen years of civil war, 
proscriptions, and misery. 

ii. The death of Caesar left for a time Marc Antony, his 
lieutenant, at the head of affairs. The murderers, unable to oppose 
the popular feeling and the power of Caesar's followers, fled from 
Rome to organise their armies in the provinces. Marc Antony had 
to compete with Octavius, the nephew of Caesar, who, as his heir, 
claimed a position and a voice in the commonwealth. The great 
orator, Cicero, was opposed to Marc Antony, and at this time 
delivered his famous philippics in the senate against him. Marc 
Antony, checked at Mutina 43 B.C., found it necessary to come to 
terms with Octavius. The result was, not the re-establishment of the 
old oligarchy, but the formation of the second triumvirate (near 
Bonnonia) 43 B.C., consisting of Octavius, Lepidus, and Marc Antony. 
These three were to reign over Rome together,- to possess the 
consular power in common for five years, and to dispose of all the 
magistracies. Their decrees were to have the force of law, without 
requiring the confirmation of the senate or people. In the disposal 
of the provinces the two Gauls fell to Antony, the Spains and pro- 
vincia to Lepidus, Africa and the islands to Octavius. Proscriptions 
followed. The triumvirs framed a list of the names of those whose 
death would be regarded as advantageous to any of the three, and 
on this list each in his turn pricked a name. The consul Pedius 
was directed to put to death seventeen persons at once. This was- 
done in the night. Antony's first victim was the orator Cicero. 
Froude speaks of Cicero as " a tragic combination of magnificent 
talent, high aspirations, and true desire to do right, with an infirmity 
of purpose and a latent insincerity of character which neutralised, 
and could almost make us forget, his nobler qualities." 1 Lepidus 
gave up his brother Paullus ; after which, three hundred senators 
and two thousand knights were proscribed and perished. After thus 
securing Rome, by leaving no one able to raise resistance, Octavius 
and Antony defeated and slew Brutus and Cassius in two battles 
at Philippi 42 B.C., after these two aristocratic murderers, whom, 
modern ignorance has styled patriots, had ruled over the East with 
such oppression and tyranny, that their defeat was received by the 
provinces as a blessing. The triumvirs then quarrelled. Antony 
seemed inclined to ally himself with Sextus Pompeius. Lepidus was 

1 " Life of Caesar." 



to the Christian Era. 123 

removed from the triumvirate, and an open rupture took place 
between Antony and Octavius. Antony was defeated at Actium 
31 B.C., and retreated to Egypt, where he stabbed himself, and died 
in Cleopatra's arms 30 B.C. ; her own suicide followed, and Octavius, 
better known as Augustus, returned to Rome, and is henceforth 
regarded as the first monarch of the empire of Rome. The system 
followed by the republic in appointing its praetors and consuls (on 
leaving office) to the government of distant provinces, with absolute 
power and with armies under their command, had borne its natural 
fruit. Pompey, Caesar, and suchlike men, having once, for periods 
of years, exercised supreme power over nations larger and more 
populous than Italy, were naturally unwilling to submit to the 
authority of a degraded and selfish oligarchy as represented by the 
senate, or to an ignorant and greedy mob which had succeeded to 
the place of the Roman comitia. It was well for Rome that it fell 
into the hands of Augustus. Freeman defends the senate, and his 
remarks, so far as they apply to the general beneficial actions of the 
senate previous to the triumvirate, are just; but this was a very 
different senate under the dictatorship and murderous executions of 
the triumvirs. Upon this latter senate that of Augustus, renewed 
and reformed by him, was a great improvement, especially as it had 
no longer the power to plunder and tyrannise over the provincials. 
The time in which there had been free discussion in the old senate 
had long passed away, and there were few left who regretted the 
previous senates as assemblies " deserving the grateful remembrance 
of mankind." 1 

12. "The hour has at length arrived for the full acquiescence of 
both nobles and people in the inevitable yoke impending upon them 
for a hundred years ; but, if the hour has arrived, so has the man 
also. Octavius and his epoch were made for each other. At no 
other period could he have formed the monarchy on an immovable 
basis j but even at that era none but himself could so have fixed it. 
.... The art of the last conqueror of the Romans lay in the 
concealment of his art, in persuading his subjects that the republic 
still continued to exist, while they were, in fact, no better than the 
slaves of a monarchical despotism." 2 All this is true, but the 
" despotism " was better than that triumviral anarchy and murder 
and a helpless senate. The "slavery " consisted not in the loss of 
constitutional government, but in the non-exercise, by a mob, of 

1 Freeman's "Essays," second series, pp. 337-339. 

2 Merivale, "Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 544. 



124 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

suffrages, the abuse of which had ruined the republic. The position 
of Augustus was well defined in the expression of Tiberius, his 
successor : " I am master of my slaves, imperator of my soldiers, 
and prince of the citizens." * There was another side, by no means 
pleasing. From the will of the emperor there was, however, no 
escape. He might or not observe legal forms, or he might, by a 
quiet message, bid a man open his veins in his bath and die ; or he 
might send his death-warrant to the greatest of his nobles by his 
soldiers, who could execute it without opposition. There was no 
safety in flight, for there were only barbarians outside the Roman 
world. The populace of Rome and the praetorian guards were the 
only powers which the emperors feared, and which were the only 
practical checks on his authority. Bunsen happily describes the 
imperial government as " a system of rule from above, without any 
degree of spontaneity from below." 2 

The Roman empire under Augustus contained a population 
estimated at from 85,000,000 to 120,000,000, one-half of which 
were slaves, or serfs, variously employed, some in trades, but all of 
them practically under the control of their masters. About 200 
tribes or nations, exhibiting every variety of civilisation, language, 
and religion, were thus placed under a strong and generally equitable 
government. The army, a standing army of thirty legions, each 
averaging 12,000 men, in all 360,000, was stationed in the provinces, 
chiefly to guard the frontiers. Italy had 20,000 praetorian guards, 
whose head-quarters were at Rome. Five fleets were stationed in the 
Mediterranean and Black Seas and the British Channel. Gibbon 
gives the entire amount of the army and navy at 450,000. Excellent 
roads and regular posts kept up an easy communication between 
Rome and the distant provinces. The revenue of the empire has 
been estimated at from fifteen to twenty millions sterling (not 
including that portion of the cost of the armies and of the civil 
government of the provinces paid out of the provincial treasuries). 
In the administration of the government, Augustus and his 
immediate successors maintained the forms of the republic. He 
himself was dictator, imperator, tribune, censor, and pontifex 
maximus : all these offices united in him made him legally the 
sovereign of the empire. The consuls and magistrates were appointed 
as usual, but the offices were mere titles by which the friends of the 
imperator were rewarded. The senate was completely subservient, 

1 Merivale, "Fall of the Roman Republic," p. 547. 

2 Edinburgh Review, No. cxxix. p 330. 



to the Christian Era. 125 

and the old assemblies of the people were by degrees discontinued. 
This mongrel race, demoralised by grants of corn and the idleness 
thus fostered by a mistaken charity, were truly what Cicero calls 
them, the "fax populi" ; they enjoyed their animal life cheered by 
the public games and spectacles, and could not regret the republican 
institutions, which were only remembered by the most aged; nor had 
they any wish to fall back upon a state of society in old republican 
Rome, in which every man who was a citizen had to work for his 
living, and fight gratis, or for a small pay, for the state. The govern- 
ment of the distant provinces was administered by Augustus and by 
the senate. Augustus had permitted the patronage and control of 
the senate over these provinces, which needed no armies for their 
defence ; their governors were called proconsuls, and had no military 
power. Other provinces exposed to invasion, in which military 
governors were appointed by Augustus, were ruled by praeses, 
legates, or propraetors, with regular salaries, and were under strict 
control, so that the provinces were great gainers by the transition 
from the oligarchic to the imperial government. The tyranny of the 
worst of the emperors, though a great evil to the senate and the 
higher classes of Rome, did not affect the populace or the provinces. 
A certain portion of the revenue was administered by the senate, 
but the larger portion by the emperor. His private revenue was 
derived chiefly from the public lands. Officers called procurators 
were appointed by the emperor to watch over and collect his 
revenues, and sometimes these men had the government of small 
provinces conferred upon them, as in the case of Pontius Pilate, who 
was Procurator of Judea. Egypt was governed by a Roman knight 
(eques) invested with almost regal power. 

There was great variety of political status in the provincial towns 
of the Roman world, but, in all cases, a large amount of self-rule. 
Each conquering general, guided by a commission or instructions 
from the senate, had framed the law of each province, had fixed the 
amount of tribute, and had given or withheld special privileges to 
friends or foes. But the old forms of natural life were respected, and 
the provinces were left to manage their own local affairs as they pleased. 
Each province lived its separate life with its varying usages. The 
cities were either colonise or municipia, to which were granted the 
full Roman franchise. Others had the Latin rights, usually con- 
nected with the Latin race, and participating in its privileges. 
Others were free or federate cities, with the rights of freedom and 
immunity from taxes, guaranteed by special treaty. There were also 
stipendiary towns, subject to tax and tithe, but administered by their 



126 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

own magistrates. Around each of these were grouped a number of 
villages, hamlets, cantons, more or less dependent on the central 
town. In towns of the higher class the magistrates held office only 
for a year : the duumviri (like the consuls), the two aediles, two 
quaestors, or treasurers. The council (ordo decurionum) consisted 
of ex-magistrates, and others of local dignity and wealth. Popular 
meetings, in these cities, were held and votes taken of approval and 
disapproval, long after they had ceased in Rome itself. Popular 
contests were real, and accompanied by strong excitement (as in our 
own elections in England). These offices were rather burdensome than 
lucrative. In the decline of the empire, when the responsibility for 
the taxes was laid upon them, the burden was felt to be unbearable, 
and men were compelled by law to accept offices and obligations 
from which they endeavoured to escape." 1 

" There had been a general decline of population in the ancient 
world, which may be dated from the second century before Christ. 
The last age of the republic was, perhaps, the period of the most 
rapid exhaustion of the human race; but it was arrested under 
Augustus, when the population recovered for a time in some quarters 
of the empire, and remained at least stationary in others." ~ Rome 
itself had a population of about i,oi6,ooo, 3 which may be arranged in 
four classes : the first consisting of the senatorial families, the equites, 
or knights, the functionaries, and citizens, whose incomes equalled 
200,000 sesterces (equal to ,1,700) ; the second class, inferior 
functionaries, bankers, merchants, traders, and artisans, who had 
their "colleges," i.e., clubs or guilds ; the third class, the proletarians, 
rated according to numbers, who, having no property, paid no taxes, 
and lived upon the public largesses of corn. Their number in the 
time of Julius Caesar and of Augustus was 320,000 ; the fourth class 
consisted of strangers and slaves. The free population and the 
slaves may be reckoned at half a million each ; the garrison, under 
Nero, 16,000. 

We must not conceal the cruelty of the Roman commonwealth to- 
wards the conquered. Witness the execution of Pontus, the gallant 
leader of the Samnites, 290 B.C. When Capua was taken, in the Second 
Punic War, the senators were beheaded, and the whole population, 
mainly a civilised and educated class, sold for slaves. Caesar's Com- 
mentaries abound in instances of cold-blooded cruelty which, at that 

1 W. W. Cope, "Early Empire." 

2 Merivale, " Hist, of the Roman Empire," vol. vii. p. 608. 

3 According to Champagny, quoted by Sheppard, pp. 27-81. 



to the Christian Era. 127 

time, were considered justifiable in war. Eight hundred cities were 
destroyed by him, provinces desolated, the populations reduced to 
slavery, thousands mutilated and drowned, and no matter to him, as 
they were not Romans. " He was chary of Roman life and Roman 
blood he would spare it when it could be spared but he would 
spill it like water when the spilling of it was necessary to his end." l 
The Veneti were severely punished for their resistance, the senate 
put to death, the people sold for slaves. At Avaricum (Bourges), 
out of a population of 40,000, only 800 escaped. And at Alesia 
(Alise) the same mercilessness was manifested. The brave Vercin- 
getorix, who so nobly defended his people, and who at last gave 
himself up to Caesar, inspired neither admiration nor pity. After an 
imprisonment of six years he was strangled, just as Caesar's triumphal 
car was ascending the capitol. What a blot on the general magna- 
nimity of Caesar ! But with him, as with all the Romans of his day, 
there was no respect for life, or for human rights, outside of Rome ; 
and this led to an equal disregard of the life of the citizens of Rome 
itself. The instances here cited are but specimens of the recklessness 
of human life and the indifference to human suffering common both 
to the ancient Romans and Greeks. Neither must we forget "the 
inherent wickedness of the empire itself," to use the strong language 
of Freeman, which, though correct, must be taken in connexion with 
the fact that it was for the time a less evil than anarchy. " The Roman 
empire did its work in the scheme of Providence ; it paved the way 
for the religion and civilisation of modern Europe .... it may 
have been a necessary evil .... a lesser evil in the choice of evils, 
but it was in itself a thing of evil all the same. It showed with ten- 
fold aggravation all that we look upon with loathing in the modern 
despotisms of Austria and Russia .... whatever were its results, 
however necessary, it was in its own time, it was in itself a wicked 
thing, which for so many ages crushed all natural, all intellectual life 
in the fairest regions of three continents." - 

13. The affairs of the Jewish nation, settled in Palestine (concen- 
trated in the narrow limits of Judea), but mixed up with a Greek- 
Syrian population in the north (Galilee), form no part of the general 
history of this period. The conquests of Alexander and their division 
among his generals changed the condition of affairs in Egypt and 
Syria nominally, but left Judea as a sort of intermediary land, alter- 
nately subject to Egypt and Syria. The Jews remained unmolested 

1 A. Trollope, "Ancient Classics : Csesar," p. 167. 

2 Freeman's "Essays," second series, pp. 335, 336. 



128 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

placed under the power of Egypt, while inhabiting the rugged 
highland territory between the plains of the coast and the Jordan 
valley. The old Philistine cities, Gaza, Joppa, Accho, were rebuilt 
and settled by Greeks. So also Scythopolis and Caesarea-Philippi to 
the north ; to the east, Philadelphia and other towns beyond 
Jordan. After a contest of one hundred and forty years, Palestine 
became Syrian, 188 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes, king of Syria, 
endeavoured to destroy the Jewish religion and to establish his 
Grecian polytheism. (The sufferings of the Jews are exhibited in the 
books of Maccabees, and referred to in Hebrews, xi. 35-38.) Resist- 
ance began at Modin, 166 B.C., under a priest, Judas Maccabeus (the 
Hammer, called also the Asmonean, after his family name). Before 
his death, in battle, he had obtained an alliance with Rome, 161 B.C. 
Jonathan, his son, and Simon, the brother of Jonathan, secured 
the independence of the Jews 143 B.C. John Hyrcanus, son of 
Simon, maintained the national independence 141 B.C. He destroyed 
the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim 109 B.C. The Grecian 
tastes and the beginnings of the religious corruption are seen in Aristo- 
bulus I., who assumed the title of king 106 B.C., and in Alexander 
Jannaeus, 104 B.C., and Hyrcanus II., 78 B.C. Aristobulus II. disputed 
the succession, and compelled Hyrcanus to resign. In this family 
quarrel Antipater, an Idumaean, and the Romans interfere. Hyr- 
canus was restored to the priesthood, but placed, not as king, but 
ethnarch of Judaea, 64 B.C., by Pompey. After the battle of Pharsalia, 
Julius Caesar made Antipater Procurator of Judea, Samaria, and Gali- 
lee, 48 B.C., Hyrcanus remaining High Priest. This was the beginning 
of the supplanters of the Maccabean (Asmonean) family. Herod, 
the son of Antipater, favoured by the Romans, became king 36 B.C. 
His cruelty and tyranny are well known. He died soon after the 
birth of our Lord, 4 B.C. 

14. India. Buddhism continued to increase and rival Brahminism. 
In 247-244, Asoka, one of the successors of the great Chandragupta, 
was the leading protector of the Buddhists. Under him a grand 
council was held at Patna, 244 B.C., which revised the formulas of 
the system. It contined from this time to be the popular religion in 
India, and extended to Ceylon. The Greek kingdom of Bactria was 
destroyed by a Tartar tribe, 126 B.C. There were about eighteen 
native states of whose history in detail we know very little, and 
what is related of them is very doubtful. Vikramaditya, king of 
Ujjain, drove back the Scythian invasion 57 B.C. 

China. The disordered state of China continued. The Chow 
Dynasty was superseded by the Tsin Dynasty, 255 B.C. In 246 B.C. 



to tlie Christian Era 129 

Che Hwang-te, the first real emperor, began to reign. His 
capital was Heen-yang (Segan Foo). He chastised the Heung-noo 
Tartars, and drove them to the mountains of Mongolia, put down 
rebellion, and ruled over all China proper. He began the great 
gigantic wall 214 B.C., and had all the books referring to the past 
history destroyed. On his death the empire was torn by dissensions 
until 206 B.C., when Kaou-te established the Han Dynasty (first at 
Lozong in Honan, and then at Changan in Shensi). His successor 
tried to recover the lost literature of old China, and partially suc- 
ceeded. China was disturbed by the Heung-noo until 121 B.C., 
Woote subdued them. The Han Dynasty was ready to fall by the 
beginning of the tenth era. 

Japan. The Mikado rulers advancing and pressing the Ainos 
further north. 

15. LITERATURE. Greek: In philosophy we have to notice Arce- 
silaus, the founder of the Middle Academy, 278 B.C. ; Pyrrho, of Elis, 
the Sceptical philosopher, 300-280; Carneades, the founder of the 
Third Academy, 213-129; Philo of Larissa, the founder of the 
Fourth Academy; and Antiochus of Ascalon, his pupil, 100-69 B - c - 
But, apart from the niceties of the philosophic school, the practical 
philosophy of the century and a half before Christ was either that of 
the Stoics, adopted by some of the wisest and best of the Romans, 
or that of Epicurus, modified to meet the growing taste for mere 
sensual enjoyments. Epicurus, who lived 340 to 270 B.C., was no 
sensualist, for while he taught that pleasure was the main end of life, 
he also taught that there could be no pleasure apart from virtue. 
There is no ground for the general misconception of the character of 
his philosophy. The mathematical sciences were patronised by the 
Ptolemies in Egypt; Euclid, the father of mathematics, 323-283 B.C.; 
Apollonius (conic sections) 250 ; Eratosthenes, mathematics and 
geometry, 175 B.C.; Hipparchus (162-127), the first cataloguer of 
the stars; Aristarchus of Samos, 280-264 B.C., anticipated the Coper- 
nican system, except the law of gravitation ; Archimedes in Sicily, 
212-146 B.C. ; Aristophanes of Byzantium (under the Ptolemies, 213) 
invented the Greek accents ; Aristarchus, a grammarian who studied 
Homer, 160-100, lived in Egypt. In poetry and Greek literature, 
Theocritus, Bion, and Moschus, 275 B.C. ; the Alexandrine poets, 
Callimachus, 256, Apollonius Rhodius, 196 B.C., Theophrastus (the 
Characteristics), 280 B.C. Among the historians Berosus (History of 
Babylon), 300-280 B.C.; Polybius (History of Greece; a work "full of 
the most profound political wisdom"), 204-123 ; Arrian- (History of 
Alexander), 100 B.C.; Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Roman History), 

K 



130 From the Empire of Alexander, 330 B.C., 

50 B.C. ; and Diodorus Siculus, 60 B.C., who attempted a sort of 
universal history. Latin: The most ancient Latin is found in the song 
of the Fratres Arvales, an agricultural corporation adopted by the 
Romans from the Sabines, and in the Laws of the Twelve Tables (the 
decemviri), all of which had become obsolete in the second century 
before Christ. Ennius, a Greek, was the first author in Latin 
literature. He taught the Oscan and Greek languages, and was the 
friend and teacher of old Cato and the Scipios, 239-169 B.C. Livius 
Andronicus, Cneius Nevius Pacuvius, Accius, were dramatic poets 
240-219 B.C. Nevius indulged in satire, which brought upon him the 
anger of the Scipios and the Metelli. Fabius Pictor and Cincius Alimen- 
tus were annalists 225-119 B.C. Cato the Censor wrote on husbandry -, 
234-146 B.C. Plautus and Terence, the greatest of the dramatists^ 
190-146 B.C. The Greek philosophy was first introduced into Rome 
by the embassy sent by the Athenians, consisting of Carneades of 
the Academy, Diogenes the Stoic, and Critolaus the Peripatetic, and, 
although condemned by Cato and the old school, became popular 
among the Roman nobles. This study, and that of the Greek litera- 
ture, was further promoted by the influence of the Achaean hostages, 
brought to Italy after the conquest of Achaia, -146 B.C., among whom 
was Polybius, the friend of Paulus ^Emilius and of Scipio Africanus. 
From this time it became the fashion for all well-educated Romans 
to read, speak, and write the Greek language. The decay of the 
old Roman character has been attributed to the influence of the 
Greek philosophy, but this is a mistake. Roman integrity and sim- 
plicity had ceased to be prominent virtues of the Roman character 
long before the Greek philosophy was popular at Rome. Lucretius, 
the poet of the Epicurean philosophy and of the atomic theory, pub- 
lished his poem 57 B.C. The writings of Julius Caesar (Commen- 
taries), 100-45 B -C. j Cicero (letters, orations, and philosophy), 105-43 
B.C. ; Sallust (history), 86-46 B.C. ; Varro (agriculture and grammar), 
1 1 6-2 8 B. c. ; and Nepos (biographies) 40 B. c. The poets of the Augus- 
tan age Virgil, 71-19 B.C., Horace, 65 B.C.-8 A.D., Tibullus, 51 B.C., 
Catullus, 84-47 B.C., Ovid, 43 B.c.-i8 A.D., Propertius, 24 B.C. are 
well known. Maecenas was the great patron of literature, and Livy 
was the historian, 59-17 B.C. 

JEWISH LITERATURE. The foundation of Alexandria affected the 
literature of Judea. Thousands of Greeks were settled in that city 
and endowed with peculiar privileges. For them, and for the use of 
the Alexandrian library, founded by Ptolemy Philadelphia 260 B.C., 
the translation of the Jewish Scriptures into Greek was commenced 
about 250 B.C., and perhaps completed by 200 B.C. This is called 



to the Christian Era. 131 

the Septuagint, from a supposed company of seventy translators. 
There are also a series of writings in the Greek language which form 
the Apocrypha, often appended to the Old Testament, but not 
received as authoritative by the Protestant Churches. The most 
valuable of these are the Wisdom of Solomon, a philosophical 
treatise by some Alexandrian Jew, about 145 B.C. ; the book of 
Ecclesiasticus, or, the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, written 
in Hebrew 280 or 219 B.C., and translated into Greek 230 or 180 B.C. ; 
the two books of Maccabees (historical), probably written early 
in the first century B.C. Another apocryphal book not included 
in the collection appended to the Bible is the book of Enoch, 
supposed to be that quoted by the Apostle Jude ; this book was 
written between 144 and 50 B.C. in the opinion of Ewald. The 
translation called the Septuagint had a very important influence 
in bringing the facts of the Jewish history and of the teachings of 
the prophets within the reach of the literary heathen. It became 
the version used exclusively by the Jews dispersed over the world, 
and even in Judea itself. The language of the Septuagint was 
the language mainly spoken by our Lord and his Apostles, and the 
language in which the Gospels and the Epistles were first written ; 
though some think the Gospel of Matthew first appeared in the 
Hebrew-Syrian of that period. 



State of the World at the Christian Era, i A.D. 

EUROPE. 

THE ROMAN EMPIRE comprised Gaul, Spain, Italy, Greece, Sicily, 
Thrace, Illyricum, Mcesia, Rhaetia, with Crete and the Greek 
Islands ; also Corsica and Sardinia. 

SCANDINAVIA, with Germany, as yet inhabited by Teutonic tribes, 
pressed by Sclavoniahs from the East. 

THE BRITISH ISLANDS inhabited by Keltic races ; a German emigra- 
tion settled on the east coast. 

ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR and its petty kingdoms, with Syria, Armenia to the 
Euphrates, belonging to Rome. 

K 2 



132 State of the World at the Christian Era. 

ASIA, west of the Indus and east of the Euphrates, to the Parthians. 

INDIA disturbed by the contests between the Buddhists and the 
Brahmins. 

CHINA under the declining power of the Han Dynasty. 

JAPAN under the Mikado rulers, gradually driving the Aionos 
northward. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT and north Africa to Rome. The Berbers and other nomad 
races kept in check by the Roman power. The city of 
Carthage and territory adjacent had been re-colonised, 
122 B.C., by the Romans. 

ETHIOPIA had its own king at Meroe, and also in Abyssinia there 
were petty kingdoms, whose history is doubtful. 



FIFTH PERIOD, 

To the Final Division of the Roman Empire 
by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 






I. The Empire to 395 A.D. 

i. THE firm establishment and long continuance of an empire 
comprising all the civilised nations of the world surrounding one 
great lake, the Mediterranean Sea, is a fact unparalleled in the past 
history of mankind, and one which cannot reasonably be expected 
to recur at any distant future. Its peculiar civilisation isolated it 
from all barbaric influences and sympathies. It was the world, the 
whole world, to the Roman, who could not conceive of any condition 
of society apart from the institutions of Rome. For four centuries- 
trie history of this empire is really the history of the world ; with the 
exception of the Parthian and Persian semi-barbarous rule to the 
east of the Euphrates, and the vast and unexplored barbaric world 
to the north and east, occupying the countries now known as- 
Scandinavia, Germany, Poland, Russia, and the vast region extending 
to the great wall of China. In this vast unknown region there were 
powerful tribes already beginning to press upon the Sclavonic and 
German races, and preparing to occupy positions dangerous to the 
partially civilised races bordering on the Roman frontier. Long 
before, the Romans had had some experience of the bravery of the 
Keltic Gauls in the burning of Rome 395 B.C., in the war with the 
Cisalpine Gauls, 236-222 B.C., and in the fearful invasion of the 
Kimbri and Teutones, 113-101 B.C., from which they had been 
delivered by the victories of Marius. Thoughtful men might- 
suppose that the barbaric power far beyond what had hitherto been 
encountered might be a source of trouble to the state, but no one 



!34 To the Final Division of the 

anticipated danger. So far, the barbarians had made raids simply 
for plunder, and the ability of the legions had on all occasions been 
equal to the task of repression and control. For four centuries the 
Roman world, except on its frontiers, knew nothing of war. There 
was internal peace and security ; freedom of transit from Britain to 
the south of Egypt, and from the western Atlantic to the Euphrates ; 
a general security of life and property such as had never been known 
before. Outwardly, there was what the world had never known 
before a comity of nations united in one citizenship, the only 
palpable division being the predominance of the Latin language in 
the West, and that of the Greek in the East. The great lake, the 
Mediterranean, was the highway of commerce, the bond of union 
between the North and the South, the East and the West; the 
piratical fleets, which once had interfered with navigation, had been 
put down by the strong hand of Rome, and the Roman world had 
peace. Men with incomes derived from estates, the higher classes of 
Roman society, the financial companies which farmed the revenues, 
the trading classes, in fact, all who had property or position, 
might probably think that the golden age had commenced. How 
the slave, the gladiator, the serf, and the classes not included 
in the gifts of bread bestowed on the proletarian mob of Rome, 
regarded the world around them, we cannot tell ; but we may imagine 
that, from their point of view, the prospect was by no means satis- 
factory. But then, as now, the prosperous classes were hardly aware 
of the pinch which was felt by the classes with which they seldom 
came in familiar contact. This increased and increasing harshness 
and selfishness of the Roman character, in the decline of the republic 
and during the empire, was, to some extent, combated and checked 
among the higher classes by the Stoic philosophy, and yet more 
largely and effectively in all classes by the spread of Christianity. 

2. To assist the memory, it may be desirable to adopt the classifi- 
cation of the Roman emperors proposed by the able author of 
" Italy and her Invaders." T 

(i) THE JULIAN AND CLAUDIAN EMPERORS. Augustus, the 
Imperator, exercised an absolute despotism under the forms of the 
old republic (as already shown). One great event distinguishes his 
reign, the birth of our Lord at Bethlehem, shortly before the death 
of Herod the Great, king of Judea, under the protection of Rome 
4 B.C. " Henceforward, the Roman empire acquires, in our eyes, a 
nearer interest ; as a country to which we were before indifferent, it 

1 Thomas Hodgkin, 2 vols. 8vo., 1880. 



Roman Empire by T/ieodosms, 395 A. D. 135 

becomes at once endeared to us, when we know it to be the abode of 
those we love. In pursuing the story of political crimes and miseries, 
there will be a resting-place for our imaginations, a consciousness 
that, amidst all the evil which is most prominent on the records of 
history, a power of God was silently at work, with an influence 
continually increasing, and that virtue and happiness were daily more 
and more visiting a portion of mankind which till now seemed to 
be in a condition of hopeless suffering. The reader who has accom- 
panied us through all the painful details presented by the last century 
of the Roman commonwealth, will be inclined, perhaps, with us to 
rejoice in the momentary contemplation of such a scene of moral 
beauty." 1 But this period of the world's history was regarded by 
Livy as the beginning of a decline : " The day of action for doing 
and daring had gone by, and now the dead calm of the Pax Romana 
was spread over the earth." He hopes that "one reward of this my 
toil (his history) will be that, for a time at all events, I shall be 
enabled to forget the desolation which has come upon our nation, 
that has now reached a pitch of iniquity at which it can bear neither 
its own vices nor yet the remedies for them." 3 One great misfortune 
darkened the last days of Augustus, the defeat and destruction of 
Varus and his legions, numbering thirty thousand men, in the 
Teutoburg Forest in Germany, by the German hero Arminius, 9 A.D. 
This was deeply felt by the old emperor, and he was frequently 
heard crying out, " Varus, give me back my legions ! " Tiberius 
succeeded, 14 A.D., an able but cruel tyrant. By his Procurator of 
Judea, Pontius Pilate, our Lord was crucified at Jerusalem, 30 A.D. 
While Tiberius "was most unpopular with every class at Rome 
.... he was regarded by the provincials as a wise, a temperate, 

and even a beneficent sovereign It almost seems as if there 

had been one emperor in the capital and another outside the walls." 3 
The reason is, that in Rome there were numerous rich and influential 
families, many of them known to be opposed to the imperial rule, of 
whom the emperor was jealous, and from which jealousy they suffered. 
The asserted disgraceful excesses of the old Tiberius at Capri have 
possibly some foundation, but must be received with caution as the 
statements of personal enemies. Caligula was a madman, 37 A.D., 
but not without critical judgment, when he compared Seneca's 
disjointed sentences to sand without cement. Claudius, 41 A.D., 



1 Dr. Thomas Arnold, " Encyc. Metrop.," vol. x. p. 380. 

2 "Ancient Classics : Juvenal," pp. 48, 49. 

3 "Ancient Classics: Tacitus," p. 55. 



136 To the Final Division of the 

had occasional glimpses of good sense and right feeling ; he first 
admitted a Gaul into the senate, thus beginning the practice of 
infusing provincial blood into the Roman councils. Nero, who 
ruled from 54 to 68 A.D., began with promise of virtuous action, 
which was followed by the display of folly, and by the exercise of a 
capricious cruelty upon the wealthy and senatorial families at Rome. 
Under Nero the first persecution of the Christians commenced, after 
the fire which consumed a large portion of the city of Rome, 64 A.D. 
"Nero fiddled while Rome was burning," and charged the guilt of 
the fire to the Christians. In this persecution St. Paul, and probably 
St. Peter, suffered martyrdom, 64-68 A.D. In the opinion of Canon 
Farrar, 1 and others, Nero is the typical Antichrist of the Apocalypse, 
The tyranny of these emperors and of their successors met with no- 
popular resistance, as it was mainly experienced by the higher classes, 
and was little known and cared for beyond the precincts of the court 
The mongrel population of Rome were satisfied with their free grants 
of corn and the games and shows provided for them at the public 
cost, while the provinces had reason to be thankful for the jealous- 
oversight of the imperial ruler, who would tolerate no injustice, at 
least, in his subordinates. With Nero the Julian and Claudian 
Caesars became extinct 68 A.D. Of the Caesarian family, numbering 
forty-three, thirty-two died violent deaths. After the brief rule and 
speedy deaths of Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, Vespasian began the 
line of 

(2) THE FLAVIAN EMPERORS. Vespasian, the commander of the 
Eastern armies, began to reign 69 A.D. ; he was compelled by the 
extravagance of his predecessors to replenish the treasury by 
increased taxation. Titus, his son, commander in the East, put 
down the rebellion of the Jews, destroyed the Temple and the city 
of Jerusalem, according to the prediction of our Lord (Matt, xxiv., 
Mark xiii., Luke xxi.). Titus succeeded Vespasian, 79 A.D. ; he is 
called "the delight of mankind." Domitian, his brother, who 
succeeded, 81 A.D., was an able but stern tyrant. It was but small 
comfort to the sufferers to know that " in all his cruelty and wicked- 
ness there was an intelligent purpose," that is to say, from his point 
of view. 2 With him the Flavian house came to an end. He was 
the last of the twelve Caesars to whom that term has been specially 
applied. 

(3) THE ADOPTED EMPERORS began with the aged Nerva, chosen 
by the senate, 96 A.D. With his reign commenced a period of 

1 " Life of St. Paul," vol. ii. p. 292. 2 " Ancient Classics : Pliny," p. 26. 






Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 137 

eighty-four years, which Gibbon terms the happiest of all periods in 
the history of the world. " If a man were called upon to fix the 
period in the history of the world during which the condition of 
the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would without 
hesitation name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to 
the accession of Commodus, 96-180 B.C. The vast extent of the 
Roman empire was governed by absolute power under the guidance 
of virtue and wisdom. The armies were restrained by the firm but 
gentle hand of four successive emperors, whose character and 
authority commanded involuntary respect. The forms of the civil 
administration were carefully preserved by Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, 
and the Antonines, who delighted in the image of liberty, and were 
pleased with considering themselves as the accountable ministers of 
the laws." 1 Trajan, 98 A.D., was a conqueror who carried the 
legions beyond the Euphrates, humbled the Parthians, and extended 
the northern frontier by the annexation of Dacia. Hadrian, 117 
A.D., " the most versatile and paradoxical of men," travelled over 
the whole empire, and suppressed with great severity an insurrec- 
tion of the Jews. By his " Perpetual Edict," he simplified the 
rules and forms of law, and prepared the way for the codifications 
of the later emperors. Antoninus succeeded 138 A.D. "The 
consent of antiquity plainly declares that Antoninus was the first, 
and, saving his colleague and successor Aurelius, the only one of the 
emperors who devoted himself to the task of government with a 
single view to the happiness of his people .... he equally 
deserved to be called the Numa of the empire, but his great merit 
.... was his protection of the Christian. 2 Marcus Aurelius, 161 
A.D., had a laborious and disturbed reign, through wars with the 
Parthians and the invasions of the northern tribes. A terrible plague, 
brought by the armies from the East, spread over the empire, 
followed by a long-continued scarcity by fires and earthquakes ; the 
cruel persecution of the Christians followed the panic terror caused 
by these calamities. Niebuhr is of opinion that the ancient world 
never recovered from the loss of population occasioned by this 
pestilence, which had a second outbreak in the reign of Commodus, 
during which two thousand died daily in Rome. From this time 
the decline of the power of Rome began. The barbarian power 
was aggressor j that of Rome was purely defensive. The emperor, 
whom Lecky calls " the last and most perfect representation of 

1 Gibbon's "Roman Empire," chap. ii. 

2 Merivale, " History of Rome," p. 533. 



,38 To the Final Division of the 

Roman Stoicism, 1 was conscious even before the mass of Tiis 
countrymen of the downward course on which the empire had 
entered. The despondency of the philosophic emperor is strongly 
marked in the book of 'Meditations' .... In the mind of 
Aurelius Stoicism became more than ever a matter of conscience 

and religion The fastidious pride of the Roman philosopher 

could not brook the simple creed on which the Christian leant, and 
by which he ruled his actions. To live for the state .... was the 
highest social duty in the eyes of the Romans, and especially 
in the eyes of the Roman emperors. While the people denounced 
the new believers as offenders against the majesty of the gods of 
Rome, Aurelius was not unwilling to punish them as offenders 
against her civil principles .... it is but too certain that the last 
and purest teaching of heathen morality issued in a deadly conflict 
with the truth in Jesus Christ." 2 Commodus, the son of Marcus 
Aurelius, succeeded 180 A D.; his mad career ended with his murder, 
192 A.D. Up to this period the prescription of law and usage had 
been carefully observed by the ruling power from Augustus (except 
by the mad emperors), each despot professed to be guided by the 
traditions and precedents of the republic. But the military revolu- 
tion by which the empire was distracted established the direct 
supremacy of the army for succeeding generations. Thus we come 
to a new series of military rulers, dependent on the will of the army. 
(4) THE BARRACK EMPERORS, the creation of the praetorian 
guards of Rome or by the armies on the frontiers. Some excuse 
may be found for the soldiery, in the small pay and the excessive 
price of the necessaries which the soldiers themselves had to provide. 
The full pay was eight pence a day, with deductions only five pence. 
All arts and manufactures had declined as the better instructed 
slaves died out, and all articles of manufacture became inferior and 
dearer. The cost of covering for the feet was equal to twenty-two 
francs ; beef and mutton, two and a half francs the pound j pork, 
three francs sixty centimes ; poor wine, one franc eighty the litre ; a 
fat goose, forty-five francs ; a hare, thirty-three francs ; a hundred of 
oysters, twenty-two francs. This is the view of Michelet (i. 24), but 
surely some of these prices are under peculiar circumstances. The 
emperors were at last obliged to clothe and feed their troops. 
Pertinax, a brave ruler, perished in a mutiny of the soldiers. 
Didius Julianus purchased the empire from.the mutineers, but soon 

" History of Christian Morals," vol. i. p. 316. 
2 Merivale, "History of Rome," pp. 539, 540. 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 139 

perished. Septimius Severus, by the help of the army of Pannonia, 
became emperor 193 A.D., ruled sternly but wisely until 211 A.D. 
Caracalla, his son, a mad tyrant, conferred the citizenship upon the 
whole of the free population of the empire, "annihilating legal 
distinctions;" this act completed the work, which trade, literature, and 
toleration to all religions but one were already performing, and left, 
so far as we can tell, only two nations still cherishing a national 
feeling. The Jew was kept apart, by his religion, the Greek boasted 
his intellectual superiority 215 A.D. 1 Between Caracalla, who perished 
217 A.D., to the reign of Diocletian, sixteen emperors reigned during 
a period of 65 years up to 282 AD. Among these were Macrinus, 
Elagabalus, and Alexander Severus, the latter of these firmly oppos- 
ing the corruption of his age ; Maximin, 235-8 A.D., who repulsed 
the German and other barbarians; Philip, who in 248 A.D. cele- 
brated the secular games in honour of the one thousandth year from 
the foundation of Rome ; Decius, the persecutor of the Christians, 
who died bravely opposing the Goths, 251 A.D. These Goths, 
originally from Scandinavia, settled in the Ukraine, and took posses- 
sion of Dacia, and then crossed the Danube into Moesia. Gallus, 
25 1-253 A.D., consented to pay them a yearly tribute. A great famine 
and plague over southern Europe, from 252 to 260 A.D., is said to 
have carried off one-half of the population. Valerian, after a series 
of wars with the barbarians, was taken prisoner by the Persians, 
160 A.D. Gallienus, 260-268 A.D., was successful against the 
Persians and Germans; the latter advanced as far as Ravenna. 
At this time thirty aspirants for the empire were in the field; they were 
called " the thirty Tyrants." Among these, Odenatus, of Palmyra, 
and his wife Zenobia, also Tetricus in Gaul. Claudius II. defended 
the Alemanni and Goths, 268-270 A.D. Aurelian re-established the 
empire, but relinquished Dacia to the Goths. Alarmed by the 
invasions of Italy by the Marcomanni and Alemanni, he wisely 
enlarged and strengthened the walls of Rome. The Emperors 
Tacitus, Probus, and Carus, 275-282 B.C., were fully occupied in the 
defence of the frontier. Probus first began on a large scale to form 
settlements of the barbarians on the frontiers on the Rhine, the 
Danube, in Thrace, Illyria, and in Britain. The army had received 
recruits from this source from the time of Julius Caesar, whose 
Germanic legions won the battle of Pharsalia. The praetorian life- 
guards of Tiberius were Germans. " Many writers have condemned 
this plan of barbaric enlistment, and have seen in it one of the 

1 Bryce, "History of the Roman Empire," p. 6. 



140 To the Final Division of the 

causes of the fall of the empire ; they do not see that it was a simple 
necessity. It may have taught the discipline of Rome, but without 
it Rome could not have held Italy for a week. The degraded rabble 
of foreigners and freedmen who filled her streets would not have 
stood a single shock of northern war." 1 Frequent and serious 
seditions in the armies and the relaxation of military discipline 
emboldened the barbarians to make these inroads into the empire. 
The dislike of the Roman population for military life obliged the 
emperors to depend upon barbarian volunteers. By degrees, these 
came to form the largest and most effective part of the Roman 
legions ; 2 after Constantine, they formed the majority of the troops ; 
after Theodosius, a Roman soldier is an exception. The evils arising 
out of the absence of any fixed law of succession to the throne are 
obvious in the history of the emperors. From Augustus to Dio- 
cletian, nine emperors fell victims to private conspiracies ; eighteen 
were slain by a seditious soldiery; only twelve died in peaceable 
possession of their dignities ; while thirty aspirants to the empire had 
fallen in the attempt. Diocletian, 284-305 A.D., the son of a slave, 
had risen to the consulship and the government of Mcesia, and was 
felt to be the man needed to meet the emergencies of the state, 
distracted by rebellion within and threatened by the barbarians 
outside. Having chosen Maximian as his colleague, he celebrated 
with him the last triumphal procession ever held in Rome, 303 A.D. 
Milan was made the seat of the government for the west, and 
Nicomedia for the east. Diocletian is thus the first of the 

(5) PARTNERSHIP EMPERORS. " Recognising the impossibility of 
properly ruling these vast dominions from only one seat of govern- 
ment ; recognising also the inevitable jealousy felt by the soldiers of 
the provinces of their more fortunate brethren, under the shower of 
donatives at Rome, he divided the Roman world into four great 
prefectures, which were to be ruled, not as independent states, but 
still as one empire, by four partners in one great imperial firm. 
This principle of partnership or association was made elastic enough 
to include also the time-honoured principle of adoption." 3 By 
taking a colleague and then appointing two Caesars, Diocletian gave 
a fourfold personality of imperial rule, hoping to act with fourfold 
imperial power in four imperial positions, the immediate objects 
being to check the rising up of pretenders to the empire, and the 

1 Sheppard, pp. 171, 172. 

2 Bryce, " History of the Roman Empire," p. 15. 

3 Hodgkin, " History of Italy," pp. i, 16. 



Roman Empire by Theodosiits, 395 A.D. 141 

more effective defence of the frontiers against the barbarians. "The 
founding of the kingdoms of modern Europe might have been 
anticipated by two hundred years, had the barbarians been bolder, 
or had there not arisen in Diocletian a prince active, adroit and 
politic enough to bind up the fragments before they had lost all 
cohesion, meeting altered conditions by new remedies. By dividing 
and localising authority, he confessed that the weaker heart could 
no longer make its pulsations felt to the body's extremities. He 
parcelled out the supreme power among four persons, and then 
sought to give it a factitious strength by surrounding it with an 
Oriental pomp which his earlier predecessors would have scorned." * 
A pompous phraseology was introduced (too much of which is left 
to lower the purity of language and to lessen the reverence due to 
legal authority even in our day); for instance, our clemency; my 
eternity ; the illustrious ; the spectabiles ; the clarissimi ; the per- 
fectissimi ; the egregii, &c. ; sickening and silly epithets. Diocle- 
tian's colleagues generally resided at Milan, or Aries, or Treves ; at 
the instigation of Galerius, Diocletian became a persecutor of the 
Christians, while Constantine Chlorus, the other colleague, was 
favourable to them. When Diocletian thought fit to abdicate and 
retire to Salona, he obliged his colleague Maximian to retire also, 
305 A.D. After some confusion in the succession of the emperors 
and the Caesars, Constantine the Great, the son of Constantine 
Chlorus, became sole emperor, 323 A.D. He is the first of the 

(6) THEOLOGICAL EMPERORS. Constantine removed the seat of the 
empire to the new city of Constantinople, which he had founded and 
called by his name. " The important results of this measure have 
vindicated the wisdom of Constantine." The new city was fit to do 
a work which Rome was incapable of doing. As a city, as a 
fortress, as a local seat of government, it has been more eternal 
than old Rome ; it never opened its gates to a slave or barbarian 
conqueror until 1453 A.D. It has been for fifteen hundred years 
an imperial city, and seems as if destined to be the seat of the 
empire of two worlds." 2 Constantinople secured the Eastern 
Empire, and perpetuated its existence for ten centuries after the 
Western Empire had fallen. A new organisation was given to the 
empire, and the civil and military appointments were separated. 

3. The conversion of Constantine to Christianity was, no doubt, 
the result of his personal convictions. There might also be some 

1 Bryce, "History of the Roman Empire," p. 8. 

2 Freeman's " Essays," third series. 



To the Final Division of the 

admixture of policy. Christianity, though at that time less pure 
than in the second century, had made itself felt as a power in the 
empire. Rome, the stronghold of paganism, was not friendly to 
the Constantines : the old paganism existed without life or zeal ; 
the new religion was all life and activity ; in faith and zeal every 
other system was not to be compared to it; and in intellectual 
energy it was more than equal to the pagan mind of the age. The 
lonely man, unhappy in his family and without the solace of those 
friendly relations with equals which could not be realised by the 
emperor, found consolation in the affection and admiration of the 
Christian bishops and clergy with whose interests he had identified 
himself. Of his sincerity there can be no doubt. The profound 
spiritual truths of Christianity were scarcely appreciated by him, but 
he found a firm foundation for his faith in the historical evidences 
afforded by the gospels and epistles, and in the traditions of the 
Churches. In his public and domestic life there is much that is 
painful to narrate. The deaths of his wife, of his son, and of his 
father-in-law and brother-in-law throw a shade over his character 
which cannot be removed nor even extenuated. These events help 
to illustrate the hardness of the Roman character in domestic re- 
lations ; yet Constant! ne's severity, however guilty the sufferers may 
have been, cannot be defended. But, in justice to this great but 
imperfect character, we must remember that, while we know his 
crimes, we know but little of the malign influences to which he was 
subjected, or of his deep remorse, of which his heathen contem- 
poraries speak. He went steadily forward in the main purpose of 
his later life, the advancing the interests of the Christian religion. 
"In rapid succession the act of toleration, the observance of 
Sunday, the public prayers in the army, the abolition of the punish- 
ment of crucifixion, the encouragement of slave emancipation, the 
prohibition of astrological divination, of cruel and licentious rites 
and gladiatorial games, became law. Every one of these acts was a 
gain to the empire and to mankind, such as not even the Antonines 
had ventured to attempt, and of these benefits none has been alto- 
gether lost. Undoubtedly, if Constantine has to be judged by the 
place which he occupies among the benefactors of mankind, he 
would rank, not among the secondary characters of history, but 
among the very first." 1 " .... It is one of the most tragical facts 
of all history (says John Stuart Mill) that Constantine, rather than 
Marcus Aurelius, was the first Christian emperor. It is a bitter 

1 Stanley, "Eastern Churches," p. 195. 



Roman Empire by Thecdosius, 395 A.D. 143 

thought how different the Christianity of the world might have been 
had it been adopted as the religion of the empire under the auspices 
of Marcus Aurelius instead of those of Constantine." 1 This is the 
expression of a natural feeling ; but is not the power and reality of 
Christian truth more fully manifested in the subjugation of a cha- 
racter so wayward and imperfect as that of Constantine, than it 
would have been in the case of the philosophic emperor who was 
" not far from the kingdom of heaven " ? He died 22 May, 337 A.D. 
" So passed away the first Christian emperor, the first defender of 
the faith, the first imperial patron of the Papal See, and of the whole 
Eastern Church, the first founder of the Holy Places pagan and 
Christian, orthodox and heretical, liberal and fanatical, not to be 
imitated or admired, but much to be remembered and deeply to be 
studied." 2 The empire was divided between his sons: Constantine II., 
who ruled over the west ; Constantius over the east ; and Constans 
the central provinces. By the death of Constantine, 340 B.C., and 
of Constans, 350 B.C., Constantius was left sole emperor. He was a 
persecutor of the orthodox party, but was manfully resisted by the 
great Athanasius, whose single-handed opposition to the Arian world 
has extorted the admiration of even Gibbon. Julian the Apostate 
succeeded his uncle Constantius, 361 A.D. Having no reason to 
love the religion of his uncles, he became, through the influence of 
pagan literature and philosophy, desirous of re-establishing the 
ancient idolatry ; Christians were removed from public employment, 
and all the influence of the government employed to decry Chris- 
tianity, but with little effect. In other respects he was a brave and 
able ruler, whom Gibbon delights to honour as the opponent of the 
Christian faith, but was also compelled to censure for his pitiful 
superstition and vanity. He was killed in battle with the Persians, 
363 A.D. The attachment to paganism, says Neander, lingered 
especially in many of the ancient and noble families of Greece and 
Rome, among old or new families who wished to be thought old, 
and who would be sure to take up the cause of ancestral evidence 
against modern innovation. Jovian, his successor, proclaimed uni- 
versal toleration, and died a few months after his accession. He is 
the last of the Theological emperors. 

(7) THE SOVEREIGNS OF THE SINKING EMPIRE, Valentinian I. and 
Valens, 364 A.D. The Huns having driven the Goths from Dacia, and 
compelled them to cross the Danube into the Roman territory, the 
fugitives were at first permitted to settle in Mcesia. These Goths, 

1 Quoted by Stanley, " Eastern Churches," p. 185. 2 Ibid., p. 220. 



144 -To the Final Division of tJie 

properly supported by the Roman power, might have opposed an 
effective barrier to the attacks of the Huns, but, by the tyranny of the 
Roman governor, they were driven to rebellion, and over-ran Moesia, 
Thrace, and Macedonia. Valens was defeated and killed by them 
near Adrianople 378 A.D. Theodosius the Great, his successor, made 
peace with the Goths, settling them in Moesia, Thrace, and in Asia 
Minor. In the west, the family of Valentinian I., consisting of Gratian 
and Valentinian II., were destroyed by the rebels Maximus and 
Eugenius. Theodosius avenged their death, and became sole emperor, 
394, 395 A.D. On his death, 395 A.D., the final division of the empire 
took place. The east and the west never again formed one empire ; 
the separation was made permanent by differences in theological 
opinions and in the usages of the Latin and Greek Churches. 

4. So far, outwardly, the empire seemed to be a permanent reality, 
as in the days of Augustus and the Antonines. It seemed to the 
men of that day identified with the existence of the social order and 
stability of the world itself. There was nothing in the relative 
positions of the empire and the barbarians outside which implied 
any superiority on the part of the latter. Under wise arrangements, 
the pressure of the barbarian forces on the frontier, by the judicious 
settlement of border territory, and by timely support of friendly and 
semi-civilised tribes against their fiercer enemies, might have become 
its military defence its outward barrier at least. The real weakness 
of the empire arose from the pressure of taxation (which neutralised 
the advantages of a high degree of personal liberty and of self- 
municipal government in the provinces), the practical effect of which 
was to render the empire not worth the sacrifices necessary to be 
made in its defence. The central government of the empire had 
failed to carry out the end of all good government, the well-being of 
society ; its fiscal laws were a barrier in the way of progress ; the 
whole structure of Roman society was decaying and past repair. 
The temporary improvement of trade, manufactures, and agriculture 
under the early empire had long ceased. The provincials only knew 
the central government as an exactor of taxes, and they had no 
inducement to fight for, and die in defence of, the unity of the 
empire. 

II- The Came of the Decline of the Empire. 

5. The causes to which the decline of the empire may be traced 
had been operating for centuries, (i) The numerical decline of the 

free, especially the agricultural population first observable in Italy. In 
Italy the small landholders, the class from which the armies of the 



Roman Empire by TJieodosius, 395 A. D. 145 

republic were drawn, gradually disappeared, consumed in war, or 
driven by debts incurred by the wars, had sold their small farms to 
the larger proprietors. Thus agriculture gave place to pasturage, 
and the land was in charge of the slaves of the landholders. In- 
fanticide had become common among all classes, as children were a 
burden to the luxurious inhabitants of the large cities as well as to 
the poor. In such an artificial state of society, whether in the old 
world or in the new, surreptitious checks upon population imply a 
hardness and coarseness of feeling indicative of a corrupt society 
hastening its own extinction. (2) Latif undid, or, in other words, the 
monopolising of the arable and pasture lands of Italy and the 
provinces by the large proprietors, chiefly the senatorial and official 
families. The public lands, the property of the state, were rented 
mainly in large portions to the capitalists, or the senatorial official* 
The laws to restrain and limit the extent of these properties, called 
the agrarian laws, which caused so much dissension in Rome under 
the republic, were evaded, and under the empire had become a dead 
letter. In process of time the nominal tenant claimed the proprietor- 
ship. These large territories laid out for the pasturage of cattle 
required fewer slaves, and excluded the free cultivator. (3) The 
increase of the slave population, not only on the large estates, but 
in the cities, as servants and artificers, was a serious evil. Some' 
great families possessed in their households large numbers, either at 
Rome or in their suburban villas. No room was left for the free 
mechanic or manufacturer. It is calculated that at least one- 
half of the population of the empire was composed of the slave 
class ; hence the rapid decline of the productive power of the 
empire, and the increasing poverty of all classes of the popu- 
lation. These slaves were men of the same colour as the free class. 
Their condition varied with their education and the character of 
their masters. In the rural districts there was no influence of 
opinion in favour of humanity ; and even such a man as Cato the 
Elder could discuss merely as an economical question the advan- 
tages and disadvantages of working the slave to a premature death, 
or prolonging life by a liberal usage for the sake of the profit of the 
natural increase by births. Slave life had been lightly regarded. A 
million perished in the Servile War in Sicily ; 60,000 in the rebellion of 
Spartacus, put down by Crassus. The establishments of the wealthy 
contained from 200 to 4,000. Some Roman families owned on their 
estates 10,000 to 20,000. The story in Tacitus of the execution of 
all the 400 slaves of one of the Cornelian families, because of the mur- 
der of the master by one of the slaves, illustrates the position of their 

L 



146 To tJie Final Division of the 

class. A slave was simply an animal, sometimes a highly educated man. 
A slave could live in hope of a considerate master or the prospect of 
manumission ; this was the forlorn hope of the slave. The teach- 
ings of Christianity were received readily by the better class of the 
slave population in Rome. (4) Proktaria naturally follows lati- 
fundia and slavery ; and to understand the meaning of these words, 
latifundia and proletaria, is to understand the history of the progress 
and decline of society in the civilised world. The population of 
Rome and of the larger cities, as Carthage, consisted partly of an idle 
class, maintained by supplies of corn from the state and amused by 
gladiatorial shows and public games. In these there was no support for 
law and order, but an element of danger equal to that of slavery. The 
government which fed and amused them had to watch them jealously 
as an inimical power. In Rome, Augustus fed 300,000 of this class. 
Trajan, Hadrian, and the Antonines increased the number to 500,000, 
and their successors had a still harder task to perform in supporting 
the multitude, who had neither property nor the knowledge of any 
useful art by which they might earn their living. These free-born 
state paupers were for the most part beggars, idlers, badly clothed, 
even in winter, with a tunic, rarely with a toga. What we call the middle 
class, which constitutes the healthy bulk of modern society, appears to 
have been confined to such a small number of unimportant indi- 
viduals in the cities as to have escaped the notice of historians. 
(5) The necessary increased and increasing expenditure of the im- 
perial government. For some years, during the later rule of the 
republic and during the reign of the early emperors, the accumulated 
wealth derived from the plunder of Macedonia, Carthage, Asia, and 
Egypt more than met the extravagance of the most reckless of the 
emperors. Some of the emperors were economical. Tiberius and 
the Antonines are said to have left in the treasury sums equal jto 
twenty-six or twenty-eight millions of sterling money. The exact 
revenue derived from the taxes upon property, the poll-tax, the customs, 
and the tributes of the provinces cannot be ascertained, the estimates 
varying from fifteen to forty-six millions sterling, according to the 
nature of the calculations, whether based on gross amount paid by 
the people, or on the net amount transmitted to the treasury, deduct- 
ing the cost of the provincial administration. The wars, which 
rendered necessary a large expenditure on the frontier armies, the cost 
of four emperors in the place of one, the largesses given to the 
soldiery, the bribes to the barbarians on the frontiers, added largely 
to the public burdens. A modern financier, by a wise and just 
arrangement of the incidence of taxation, might have rendered the 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 147 

payment more easy. But we must not forget that for two or more 
centuries the wealth of the empire consisted mainly in the stock of the 
hoarded plunder gradually expended by the government. There was 
very little creation of fresh wealth either by agricultural or manufactur- 
ing industry. In modern times we can calculate the value of the national 
industry annually by its exports and imports. No one has attemped 
to guess the productive power of the industry of the Roman empire. 
(6) A system of taxation, oppressive and unjust. The taxes levied 
consisted of (a) the customs duties on imports, &c. ; (b} a land-tax, 
made on the basis of a census and survey taken every fifteen years. 
The land was valued according to its produce (including the slaves 
and the cattle). This tax was partly paid in coin and partly in pro- 
duce, as corn, oil, wine, wool, which articles were conveyed to the 
imperial depot at the cost of the tax-payer. There was no power to 
make reductions or compensations, and money was not accepted for 
articles payable in kind. Hence, in many cases, cultivation became 
unprofitable and fell into disuse. Within sixty years after the death 
of Constantine the government was obliged to relieve from taxation 
330,000 acres in Campania, the most fertile land in Italy, equal to 
one-eighth of the whole surface. This land had become exhausted 
and unproductive through the neglect of manure ; (c) a capitation 
tax amounting to ^9 per head, but by head is meant more than 
several heads counted as one, in the case of the poor, while the rich 
were counted not by units, but as heads, according to the amount 
for which they were deemed liable ; (d) a lustral or trade contribution 
on persons in professions, trades, cSic., paid every fourth year ; 
(e) crown money (the aurum coronarum), exacted on any occasion 
of a public or private nature which could be put forth as an excuse 
for further taxation ; (/) the weight of taxation was felt all the heavier 
after the beginning of the second century, from the gradual dis- 
appearance of the gold and silver in circulation. The gold and 
silver of the empire was always going out in subsidies, or in articles 
of Eastern luxury, and there were no mines of the precious metals 
largely productive, and no manufactured articles the demand for 
which would have spared the bullion. The fiscal system of the 
empire rapidly overtook the profits of labour and of trade, and soon 
began to prey upon the capital of the trader and the cultivator, 
reaching the point of declension in which industry and enterprise are 
paralysed. (7) The mode of levying the taxation was peculiarly 
oppressive and unjust. A fixed amount, according to the census, 
was required from a town or district, which must be paid. What- 
ever failure might have occurred in production, either from the 

L 2 



148 To the Final Division of the 

seasons or from the abandonment of cultivation by impoverished 
landholders or occupiers of houses, or from any other cause, had to 
be made good by the solvent proprietor. So also in the larger towns 
in which corporations (curia) existed. The members of the curia 
(the decuriones) comprised the persons possessing property equal in 
value to twenty-five acres of land (more or less); these, the governing 
class, were made responsible for the amounts due by the community 
to the revenue, and they were empowered to levy the same from the 
inhabitants, and if these could not pay the decuriones must them- 
selves find the amount. They had also to find horses and equipages 
for the judges and all civil and military servants travelling on the busi- 
ness of the state. As population and wealth declined year by year, the 
burden was felt to be intolerable even before the time of Trajan, but 
it had to be borne ; there was no escape, as no member of the curia 
could remove from the city, or give up his official position, except by 
the abandonment of his property. No excuse was admitted, not 
even (in Christian times) a desire to enter the Church or the 
imperial army. Hence we may understand the gradual impoverish- 
ment of the landed proprietors and of the citizens as the normal con- 
dition of Roman life in the decline of the empire especially. An 
appointment to office in the curia was considered as nearly equal to 
a sentence of confiscation of property. Large numbers of the culti- 
vators of Gaul especially fled to the forests and the mountains and 
became brigands. From the era of Diocletian, 300 A.D., these 
Bagaudae, as they were called, became a cause of alarm to the ruling 
powers. Men with property began to doubt whether the evils of 
their position as Roman citizens were not greater than the advantages 
derived from their responsibility to the Roman government, and 
then, as a natural consequence, to look upon the barbarian rule as a 
lesser evil than the Roman tax-gatherer. It is a remarkable fact that 
the Italians and the provincials soon lost all fear of barbarian rule. 
The imperial mercenary troops and the barbarian chiefs might fight 
for the possession of the land while the population looked on with 
indifference. Judging from the picture of the oppression and misery 
connected with the collection of the taxes, drawn by Lactantius 
(300-325 A.D.), we need not wonder at this indifference towards the 
imperial rule. " It were impossible to number the officials who were 
rained upon every province and town ; but the public distress, the 
universal mourning was when the scourge of the census came, and 
its takers, scattering themselves in every direction, produced a general 
confusion, that I can only liken to the misery of a hostile invasion, 
or of a town abandoned to the soldierv. The fields were measured 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A. D. 149 

to the very clods, the trees counted, each vine plant numbered, 
cattle registered as well as men. The crack of the lash and cry of 
the tortured filled the air. The faithful slave tortured for evidence 
against his master, the wife to depose against her husband, the son 
against the sire .... In taking ages they added to the years of 
the children and subtracted from those of the elderly. Not satisfied 
with the returns of the first enumerators, they sent a succession of 
them, who each swelled the valuation as a proof of service done, and 
so the imposts went on increasing. Yet the number of cattle fell off 
and the people died. Nevertheless, the survivors had to pay the 
taxes of the dead." 1 Constantine, the Christian emperor, endeavoured 
in vain to ameliorate these evils. The necessities of the state were 
imperative. Having swallowed up income and profit, they were now 
devouring the capital of the population. (8) The deep corruption 
of life and manners in the Roman world. " This taint was not found 
in the genuine old Roman character, but was imported into it from 
Greece. Looking back through the mists of pre-historic time, we 
can clearly discern the Aryan progenitors of the Greeks, the Romans, 
and the Goths, cherishing certain religious beliefs, and certain ideas 
of a strong and pure morality, which guarded the sanctity of the 
home. The Teutons, when they descended upon the dying empire, 
still preserved that precious Aryan inheritance intact. The Greeks 
had long since lost it, or bartered it away for other gifts the products 
of their delicious climate, their sensibility to artistic impression, an 
analytical intellect, and a capacity for boundless doubt. In later 
ages, Rome, influenced by her Hellenic sister, had lost it too, and 
the corruption of her great cities showed, in all its hideousness, the 
degradation which might be achieved by a civilisation without 
morality and without God." 3 The classical writers testify to the 
correctness of St. Paul's description of the moral depravity of the 
ancient world. 3 So also " the relics of Pompeii and Herculaneum, 
the satires of Persius and Juvenal, the epigrams of Martial, and the 
terrible records of Tacitus, Suetonius, and Dion Cassius. And yet, 
even beneath this lowest deep there is a lower deep, for not even in 
their dark pages are the depths of Satan so shamelessly laid bare to 
human gaze as they are in the sordid fictions of Petronius and 
Apuleius." 4 Family life, once a sacred thing, so that for 520 years 
a divorce hac 1 been unknown, became corrupt. " Women were 

1 Lactantius, " De Morte," quoted by Michelet, vol. i. p. 241. 

2 Hodgkin, " History of Italy," &c., vol. i. p. 520. 3 Romans i. 18-32. 
4 Farrar, " Early Days of Christianity," vol. i. p. 2. 



To the Final Division of the 

married to be divorced, and divorced in order to marry again ; and 
noble matrons counted the years, not by the consuls, but by their 
discarded husbands." * " The theatrical and amphitheatrical per- 
formances of that age, idolatrous in their origin and unspeakably 
immoral in their tendency," fostered that indifference to human 
suffering, the result of which is obviously displayed in the toleration 
of gladiatorial combats. Augustus had in his time exhibited 8,000 
gladiators and 3,500 wild beasts. In the sham sea-fights of Claudius 
19,000 men fought in each. Titus in one day butchered thousands 
of Jews in the games at Berytus. In Trajan's games 10,000 men 
had to fight each other. In all these cases the fighting was real, and 
there was great slaughter. The miserable condition of the slave 
populations also was a reproach to humanity. These cultivated 
heathens of Rome were " without excuse," for although the Epicurean 
and the Sceptical philosophy had shaken the foundations of the old 
Roman morality, the Stoic philosophy, plainly and practically taught 
in the writings of Epictetus and others, had appealed to the moral 
sense and the higher aspirations of mankind. Pitiable, indeed, was 
the moral and intellectual position of the upper classes of Roman 
society. " They were destitute of faith, yet terrified at scepticism. 
They had long learned to treat the current mythology as a mass of 
worthless fable .... but they were the ready dupes of every wander- 
ing quack who chose to assume the character of a mathematicus or 
a mage. Their official religion was a decrepit theogony ; their real 
religion was a vague and credulous fatalism which disbelieved in the 
existence of the gods, or held with Epicurus that they were careless 
of mankind. The mass of tho populace either accorded to the old 
belief, which saved them the trouble of giving any thought to the 
matter .... or else they plunged with eager curiosity into the 
crowd of foreign cults, among which a distorted Judaism took its 
place." c < Christianity had already begun to vindicate the unity and 
brotherhood of the human family in connexion with the great truth of 
God's universal love and purpose of mercy towards all mankind. Such 
teachings, we know, were not without their influence ; they attracted 
especially the slave class and the freedmen, who found in the brother- 
hood of the Church that fraternity for which they yearned. Opinions 
and principles which man's higher nature recognised as good by slow 
degrees changed the character of society. Their influence in our day, 
though checked by self-indulgence, by self-conceit, and by the intense 

' Seneca, quoted by Farrar, " Early Days of Christianity," vol. i. p. 7. 
2 Ibid., vol. i. pp. 12, 13. 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 151 

absorption of men's minds in the pursuit of material interests, is on 
the increase, and will, we trust, at some future period renovate the 
world. (9) No national patriotism found place in the empire of 
Rome, nor could any provincial patriotism supply its absence. The 
provincials witnessed generally with indifference the supercession of 
the old officials, and made easy terms with their barbarian masters. 
No glorious forgetfulness of self, no efforts of despairing patriotism 
graced the extinction of the Roman empire in the West. Duruy, 
quoted by Merivale, truly remarks, " The old age of nations is rarely 
venerable, least of all that of Rome." 

/// Beyond the Roman World to the East. 
6. THE PARTHIAN EMPIRE continued to be the enemy of the 
empire, as it had been of the republic. Originating in the revolt 
of an Indo-European race from the north, which had expelled 
the governor appointed by the Seleucidae of Syria, 261-248 B.C., 
it remained under the Arsacidae until 226 A.D., when the Parthian 
rule was set aside by one Artaxerxes, a native of Farz, who 
established the dynasty of the Sassanides as rulers over the 
Persian empire, and revived the old Persian faith of Zoroaster. 
INDIAN history during this period is very difficult to unravel. 
Buddhism (a reaction against Brahminism), which had established 
itself in India under King Asoka, 250 B.C., was holding its ground 
against its Brahminical opposers. In CHINA, the first Han Dynasty 
was supplanted by the Eastern Han Dynasty under Lew Sew, 23 A.D. 
This Dynasty fell 220 A.D., and China was for a long time (above 
three centuries) distracted by civil wars. From 221 to 265 A.D. is 
the epoch of the three kingdoms, Wei, Wai, and Shuh. In 265 A.D. 
the Dynasty of Tsin in Honan reunited the empire for a short time, 
when it was again divided. Buddhism was first introduced into 
China 65 A.D. Before we had any knowledge of Chinese history, 
China was the realised Utopia of the philosophers of the eighteenth 
century. " They could point to one people whose pure and rational 
morality, purified from all the clouds of bigotry and enthusiasm, shone 
with an almost dazzling light and splendour above the ignorance and 
superstition of Europe .... and to this semi-barbarous nation they 
habitually attributed maxims of conduct that neither Roman nor 
Christian virtue had ever realised." 1 THE BARBARIAN W T ORLD, 
outside the Rhine and the Danube, comprised the Germanic (Teu- 
tonic) tribes, the Sclavonic races in North Germany, Poland, and, 
further east, the Scandinavian races beyond the Baltic, and the 

1 Lecky, " History of Christian Morals," vol. i. p. 125. 



152 To the Final Division of the 

Gothic tribes (Gepidae, Ostrogoths, and Visigoths) north of the 
Danube, in Dacia. The Gothic tribes appear to have migrated from 
Sweden (which country is called by the old chroniclers " officina 
gentium ") ; perhaps affording but poor support for its population, the 
enterprising warlike class were driven to seek new homes by emigra- 
tion. The Goths crossed the Baltic, and the last party received the 
name of Gepidae (the Loiterers). They then settled in the Ukraine, 
forming three nations the Ostrogoths, of which the Amali were the 
royal race ; the Visigoths, of which the Balti were the royal race ; and 
the Gepidae. All these were Teutons of the Low-German race allied 
to the Dutch, Frijians, and Jutes, and Angles (our Saxons). After a 
.severe contest the Emperor Aurelian gave up Dacia to them, 270 A.D., 
and they occupied Hungary (Dacia), Transylvania, Moldavia, and 
Wallachia. " This was a piece of real statesmanship. Had a similar 
policy been pursued all round the frontiers of the Roman empire, 
that empire, though in somewhat less than its greatest extent, might 
be still standing." * Here for a century they remained at peace with 
Rome, and adopting by degrees its civilisation. By the labours of 
Ulfilas (whom Constantine called " the Moses of the Goths " ) they 
were converted to the Arian form of Christianity, and with 
Christianity they received the art of reading and writing, and, soon 
after, a translation of the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue, 311-381. 
This was the beginning of a great change in the Gothic-Teutonic 
nations, all of which received Christianity in the fourth century 
except the Franks and the Saxons. There was every probability that 
.the regions inhabited by the Goths as the friends of Rome would be 
the earliest civilised, and remain the firmest barrier against the outer 
barbarians; "but a strange and terrible event, which falsified all 
these reasonable expectations, changed the destiny of every country 
in Europe, from the Volga to the Straits of Gibraltar." The HUNS, 
a barbarous Tartar race (Mongolian or Finnish), who for ages had 
dwelt along the Lake Baikel to the Wall of China, and had been the 
undisputed lords of Northern Asia and a constant trouble to the 
Chinese, found their inroads checked by the erection of the Great 
Wall of China, 213 B.C. In the year 121 B.C. the Emperor Vouti 
defeated and broke up the power of the Tanjou (the Hunnish chief), 
and in 93 A.D. the Huns were driven westward. A large body of 
them settled in Sogdiana (east of the Caspian), and are known as the 
Euthalites or Nepthalites. Another division of them advanced to 
the Wolga, and occupied on its eastern banks a country called after 

1 Hodgkin, "History of Italy," vol. i. p. 63. 



Roman Empire by Thcodosius, 395 A.D. 153 

them " Great Hungary." Here it is supposed they were driven for- 
wards by their implacable enemies, the Sinepi Tartars. On the 
banks of the Don they encountered the Alani, a pastoral people of 
Germanic and Sclavonic blood, whom they conquered and absorbed 
into their own body. The Ostrogoths submitted, so also the Gepidae. 
The Visigoths fled to the Danube, which was the boundary of the 
empire, and implored the protection of the Roman Emperor of the 
East, 376 A.D. Here was an opportunity of securing the services of 
a brave people as a barrier to the empire, by affording them assist- 
ance and treating them as allies. A warlike population more than 
a million in number crossed the Danube under terms the most in- 
sulting to a brave people; 200,000 of these were warriors; and these 
Visigoths might have been strengthened by the Ostrogoths, who 
desired to be received as allies. The treatment they received from 
the Roman government drove the men who might have been allies 
into rebellion. They defeated and slew Valens at Adrianople, 
378 A.D., and ravaged the Roman provinces. The Gothic youth 
who had been given as hostages were, in the terror of the moment, 
treacherously murdered in Asia, to the great disgrace of the Roman 
government, and to the natural increase of the enmity of the Goths. 
An attempt on the part of the Ostrogoths to invade the empire was 
defeated 386 A.D. ; this, with the quarrels of the Gothic chiefs, and 
the prudent policy of Theodosius, the colleague of Gratian, led to a 
peaceful settlement of the Visigoths in Mcesia and in Thrace. An 
army of 40,000 Goths was maintained by the government as 
"fcedorati," 383-395 A.D. These concessions were deemed dan- 
gerous, and so they were. Their justification was necessity. Had 
the Romans supported the Goths against the Huns, the Goths might 
have retained their homes in Dacia, Wallachia, &c., and the horrors 
which the empire suffered from Attila and others might have been 
spared. With respect to the Goths, the fact that Alaric himself was 
manageable when there were statesmen who knew how to conciliate 
and rule, and that his successor was made to act as a friend rather 
than an enemy, are so many proofs of the imbecility of the Roman 
statesmen. The HUNS remained in undisputed possession of the 
territory abandoned by the Gothic tribes, and by the terror of their 
savage bravery compelled, in a few years, the submission of all the 
Germanic and Sclavonic tribes from the Rhine to the Wolga. 

The trade of the empire was mostly within itself. There was a 
regular but circuitous supply of articles of luxury from India and 
China, for which, as there were no commodities provided in the 
empire which had any market in these distant lands, the price was 



1 54 To the Final Division of the 

paid in gold and silver, thus adding to the drain upon the bullion of 
the empire. There are notices of the beginning of silk manu- 
facture in Italy, though probably later than the fifth century, a linen 
manufactory in Spain, and one of cotton in Malta. There were also 
about thirty-nine manufactories of arms in the empire. The chief 
trading cities were Alexandria, Rhodes, Ephesus, and Antioch, with 
Marseilles and Carthage. A considerable land trade through Ger- 
many and the tracts now known as Poland and Russia, with the 
Baltic nations, and from the Black Sea to Tartary and China. Through 
Egypt and her navy they had a trade with Arabia and India. 

7. THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of this period is most important, 
as its main topic is the greatest of all events in the world's history 
the incarnation, the life and teaching, the death and resurrection 
and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ. The fact of the existence, 
the teaching, and the death of Christ, no rational man in the present 
age denies. In the opinion of the most learned and thoughtful of 
our scholars, there is no way of accounting for the phenomena of 
hrist and Christianity except by the admission of the truth of the 
facts and teaching presented to us in the Gospels, the Acts, and the 
Epistles, which form the New Testament. They cannot be ignored, 
as they are entwined in the history of the human race. Jesus Christ, 
in multiform manifestations, confronts us in every page of the modern 
history of mankind. " The most advanced sceptic cannot deny that, 
by His life and teaching, He has altered the entire current of history, 
and raised the standard of human morality. He closed all the 
history of the past, and inaugurated all the history of the future, 
and all the most brilliant and civilised nations worship Him as God." 
His character has compelled the wonder and admiration of many 
of the wise of this world, who do not fully recognise His Godhead. 
" He was (says Renan) the individual who had made the species 
take the greatest step towards the divine ; the Christ of the Gospels 
is the most beautiful incarnation of God in the most beautiful of 
forms; His beauty is eternal; His reign will never end. Kant 
testifies to his ideal perfection. Hegel saw in Him the union of the 
human and the divine. Spinoza spoke of Him as the truest symbol 
of heavenly wisdom ; the beauty and grandeur of His life overawed 
even the flippant soul of Voltaire. Between Him and whomsoever 
else in the world (said Napoleon I.) there is no possible term of 
comparison. If the life and death of Socrates are those of a sage 
(said Rousseau), the life and death of Jesus are those of a God. He 
is (says Strauss) the highest object we can possibly imagine with 
respect to religion, the being without whose presence in the mind, 



Roman Empire by T.heodosius, 395 A. D. 155 

perfect piety is impossible Jesus, in His all but perfect life, 

stood alone and unapproached in history. James- Stewart Mill 
spoke of Him as a man ' charged with a special, express, and unique 
commission from God to lead mankind to truth and virtue.' In his 
three essays he also speaks of Christ as 'the ideal representative 
and guide of humanity.' " l Some of these testimonies to Christ, 
the result of the power of truth, remind us of the occasion when 
" unclean spirits .... fell down before Him, and cried out, saying, 
Thou art the Son of God" (Mark iii. n). Christ, as set before us 
in the Gospels, is the enigma, the inexplicable mystery, which 
confronts the rampant infidelity of our day. The character and 
person of Christ stand out the invincible bulwark of the faith of the 
Christian Church. Whatever hypotheses may be adopted, apart 
from the admission of His divinity, they all fail to meet all the 
conditions of the problem ; to use the language of our modern 
philosophy, they are ' unthinkable.' To suppose that ' Christianity 
owed its strength and success to Hellenic culture is so contrary to 
historic evidence,' that he who makes the supposition .... shows 
himself disqualified for the task of reading history aright, and appre- 
ciating what are its moving forces Christianity confronted 

the thought of Greece with a greater thought by far, and brought 
satisfaction to the needs which the culture of Greece could awaken, 

but could not satisfy It also met those new wants of 

humanity which had been awakened for the first time in history by 
the wide dominion, the equal justice, and the common citizenship of 
the Roman empire." 2 No historical records occupy a more firm 
position than those of the New Testament. The Epistles to the 
Churches were, many of them, written before some of the Synoptic 
Gospels, all the Gospels, except the Gospel of St. John, before the 
destruction of Jerusalem, 69 A.D. The critical faculty of the early 
Christians could not easily be deceived, when they had already been 
convinced " of the certainty " of the facts by living witnesses who 
had been personally acquainted with the facts. Our conviction of 
the genuineness and the authenticity of the records rests on the 
Christian consciousness of these primitive Christians, of which the 
decisions of the councils of the Church are the undeniable evidence 
the evidence, not the authority. Before the destruction of Jerusalem, 
Christianity had been preached in the leading cities of the Roman 
empire. In the generation preceding Constantine it is calculated 

1 Farrar, "Encyc. Brit.," ninth edition, vol. xiii. pp. 657, 670. 

2 Spectator, April 14, 1883. 



156 To tJte Final Division of tlie 

that one-fourth of the population of the empire had accepted openly 
or secretly Christianity, that the zealous pagans were few in number, 
and that the majority of the population were either too ignorant, or 
too indifferent, to care for anything beyond the old pagan ritualism 
to which they had been accustomed (a form without power to interest 
or attract). This progress of the Church was accomplished in spite 
of the so-called Ten Persecutions that by Nero 64 A.D., Domitian 
81 A.D., Trajan 107 A.D. (in which latter the remarkable letter of 
Pliny vindicated the integrity of the Christians of Bithynia appeared) ; 
then follow the persecutions by Hadrian, 107 A.D. ; by Marcus Aurelius, 
163 A.D. by Severus, 201 A.D. ; by Maximin, 235 A.D. ; by Decius, 
249 A.D.; byGallus, 252 A.D.; by Valerian, 258 A.D. ; and by Diocletian, 
303 A.D. The Roman government looked with suspicion on the 
exclusiveness and the unity of the Christian Church, which, from its 
organisation, appeared to them to be an " imperium in imperio" 
representing also principles opposed to the religion and institutions 
of the empire. The attempts to ignore the exercise of a special 
divine influence on the labours of the Christian teachers because 
natural or, in other words, providential, causes co-operated in the 
spread of Christian truth, is a dispute about words. God's providence 
is evident in the natural order of events, and is also recognised 
in the power exercised by Gospel truth on men's consciences. 
"Middleton and Gibbon rendered a real, however undesigned, 
service to Christianity by attempting to prove that the rapid exten- 
sion of the primitive Church was merely the natural result of natural 
causes. For what better proof could be given of the divine origin 
of any religion than by showing that it had at once overspread the 
civilised world by the expansive power of an inherent aptitude to the 
nature and to the wants of mankind ? " * Lecky 2 also explains the 
progress of Christianity as due to the disintegration of the old 
religions and the general thirst for something to believe ; and also 
to the singular adaptation of Christianity to the wants of the times, 
and to the heroism which it inspired. He considers that " never 
before was a religious transformation so manifestly inevitable. No 
other religion ever combined so many forms of attraction as Chris- 
tianity, both from its intrinsic excellence and from its manifest 
adaptation to the special wants of the time." The gradually 
increasing importance of Christianity as a system, and the rapidly 
increasing number of its professors, may be measured by the literary 

1 Sir James Stephen, "Essays on Eccl. History," I2mo., p. 233. 

2 In his " History of European Morals," vol. i. pp. 410-418. 






Roman Empire by Theodosins, 395 A.D. 157 

movement among the philosophical class of teachers and satirists^ 
the rationalists of expiring paganism, who were seeking to establish 
Neo-Platonism and other kindred philosophies in its place. To 
these the teachings of the Christian Church were the only barrier. 
Crescens, 161 A.D., Lucian, 170 A.D., Celsus, iSoA.D., Porphyry, and 
others, all of them able and learned, have anticipated most of what 
has since been written on their side of the question. The life of 
Apollonius Tyanasus, a Pythagorean philosopher, or rather a 
pretender to miraculous power and profound knowledge, who was 
born about i A.D. and died 96 A.D., has been invidiously placed in 
competition with the character of Christ Christianity was not 
without men equally able and learned to defend its claims. These 
defences are known as " Apologies " i.e., defences, and were put 
forth by Quadratus and Miltiades addressed to Hadrian 122 A.D. ; 
by Justin Martyr to Antoninus Pius, 148-150 A.D. ; to Marcus 
Aurelius, 161-163 A.D. ; also by Melito, 170 A.D. ; by Origen, 235 A.D., 
and by Eusebius and Jerome in the fourth century. The Emperor 
Gallienus first recognised Christianity as a " religio lirita" 259 A.D. 
Galerius published an "Edict of Toleration" 312 A.D. In the 
following years it was not only tolerated, but became, under Con- 
stantine, the established religion of the empire, 324 A.D. "When 
Constantine .... took Christianity to be the religion of the empire, 
it was already a great political force, able and not more able than 

willing to repay him by aid and submission Suddenly 

called from danger and ignominy to the seat of power, and finding 
her inexperience perplexed by a sphere of action vast and varied, 
the Church was compelled to frame herself upon the model of the 
secular administration .... and just as with the extension of the 
empire all the independent rights of districts, towns, or tribes had 
disappeared, so now the primitive freedom and diversity of individual 
Christians and local Churches .... was finally overborne by the 
idea of one visible Catholic Church, uniform in faith and ritual." 1 
Unhappily, there were Christians who applied the laws of the Jewish 
theocracy to the Christian system, especially in the trying periods of 
the Donatist and Arian controversies. 

8. The secular benefit derived by the Church from the adoption 
of Christianity by Constantine were, no doubt, great, but they have 
been much exaggerated. It must be remarked that the Christian 
Church was a power which first created a public opinion in the 
Roman empire opposed to the avowed principles and practices of 

1 Bryce, pp. 10, u. 



i$S To the Final Division of the 

the imperial government. It had accumulated and retained, 
by the connivance of the authorities, large possessions, and its 
revenues were readily supplied by the voluntary gifts of Christian 
believers. Already the bishop of each imperial city was the arbiter 
and judge in most cases of dispute in which the parties were 
Christians ; he was the dispenser of charitable funds, aided by large 
numbers of clergy and laity equally charitable, and generally sym- 
pathising with the poorest, the slave not excepted. Constantine and 
his successors legalised these exercises of spiritual power and zeal, 
and to some extent increased their sphere of action. In Rome 
itself the bishop was transferred to the palace of the Lateran ; the 
estates and property confiscated by Diocletian were restored ; new 
places of worship of peculiar grandeur were built and endowed by 
the state, as the Lateran, the Vatican, St. Paul extra muros, St. Agnes, 
St. Laurence, St. Marcellinus, and St. Peter in via Laricanae. The 
value of these endowments may be guessed by the ascertained 
revenue of three of these amounting to about twelve hundred pounds 
sterling. To the Church in general the benefits were yet more 
valuable. All the privileges claimed by the Church, and all the 
property possessed by the Church, were confirmed by the state, and 
the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Church in ecclesiastical matters 
was enforced by the civil law. Each church, with its bishop and 
subordinate presbyters, deacons, &c., formed a spiritual municipium. 
Although there was no formal state support for the clergy so that, 
in some cases, the clergy were obliged to engage in trade yet from 
the contributions of the faithful, and by the voluntary payment of 
tithes, the revenue of a bishop is calculated by Gibbon and others 
to have equalled six hundred pounds per annum of our money. 
The Church was permitted to receive and hold gifts of property and 
land, and this power was occasionally so absurd as to call forth severe 
edicts, one especially in 370 A.D. by Valentinian I., respecting which 
St. Jerome remarks : " I do not complain of the edict, but I grieve 
that we should have deserved it." The clergy, however, were 
partially exempted from civil jurisdiction, and the privilege of 
sanctuary was granted to the Christian Church. The establishment 
of Sunday as a day of rest was a step which secured one day's rest 
in seven to the labourer and an opportunity for attendance upon 
public worship. The right assumed by the clergy of exercising a 
moral censorship over all classes, even the very highest, seems to 
have been regarded as essential to their position, and was used freely 
towards all classes of offenders, as, for instance, the governors of 
provinces, the clergy often opposing them in cases of cruelty and 



Roman Empire by T/wodosius, 395 A. D. 159 

oppression, after the fashion of the old tribunes of the people. In 
the arrangement of the various bishoprics the Church followed 
closely the new political division of the empire introduced by 
Constantine. This led to a great variety in the relative ranks of the 
bishops, some becoming exarchs, or primates, or patriarchs. The 
chorepiscopoi (country bishops) were by degrees suffered to die 
out, as their humbler positions reflected painfully on that of the 
bishops generally. The revenues of the churches were distributed, 
one portion to the bishop, another to the clergy, a third to the cost 
of public worship, and a fourth to the poor. 

The Christian religion rests upon the deep profound principles 
embodied in the moral constitution of the divine nature, the 
holiness of God, the irreconcilable difference between right and 
wrong, good and evil; the sense of sin, not merely as a disease, but 
as a wilful act of disobedience to the eternal law of right, so different 
from the laxity of pagan sentiment. " In the many disquisitions 
which Epictetus and others have left us, concerning the proper frame 
of mind in which men should approach death, repentance for past 
sin has absolutely no place, nor do the ancients appear to have 
realised the purifying and spiritual influence it exercises upon the 
character; and while the reality of moral disease was fully recognised, 
while an ideal of lofty, and indeed unattainable, excellence was con- 
tinually proposed, no one doubted the essential excellency of human 
nature, and very few doubted the possibility of man acquiring by his 
own will a high degree of virtue." 1 In Christianity the spiritual 
procedure was simply " Repentance towards God and faith towards 
our Lord Jesus Christ," while the leading dogmas, as in the Apostles' 
Creed, are included within a few lines. The first converts were 
mainly Hellenists and the literature Greek. When the learned 
began to formulate a theology and a moral philosophy, differences 
of opinion naturally arose. It ought to have been evident, from the 
writings of the New Testament, that Christian believers were bound 
by one common central truth, beyond which difference of opinion 
was to be tolerated as the natural result of the activity, the weakness 
and the strength of the human mind. Where the divine lawgiver 
had not imposed restriction, man had no right to call for a sub- 
missive uniformity. Differences of opinion, warm controversies 
were the natural results of attempts to explain beyond the letter of 
revelation, the great truths connected with the divine relations 
and purpose of mercy to the human race. Outside the Christian 

1 Lecky, ' History of European Morals," vol. i. p. 205. 



To the Final Division of the 

Church, there were influences exercised upon Christian opinion by 
Judaism, the Greek philosophy, and the mysticism of the Oriental 
theosophy. (i) There was an attempt to subordinate Christianity 
to Judaism, and to mix up the practices and ritual of Judaism with 
Christianity, by the Ebionites and Nazarenes. This violation of 
Christian liberty was powerfully opposed by St. Paul, the Apostle of 
the Gentiles. (2) Another class endeavoured to engraft into 
Christian theology the speculations of the Oriental Manichaeanism and 
of the Neo-Platonic sects ; hence the Gnostic heresies. These began 
with a sincere attempt to reconcile revelation with the speculations 
of the Oriental philosophy (i Tim. vi. 20). Among the various 
forms of the Gnostic theory three principles may be observed : 
(a) the opposition of spirit and matter; (ft) a demiurgos as 
Creator of the world different from the Supreme God ; (c) the 
denial of the true humanity of Christ, whose body they held to be 
a mere phantom (hence they were called Docetes). All the early 
heresies partook more or less of this character. (3) Asceticism, 
as in the case of the Montanists, by some regarded as the Puritans, 
by others as the fanatics of the early Church. (4) Some, attempt- 
ing to simplify that which is necessarily incomprehensible in the 
revelation of the divine nature, were led to entertain views similar 
to those of Arius, and to ascribe a measure of inferiority to the 
nature of our Lord, and then, step by step, to see nothing except the 
humanity in the nature of Christ. We may rejoice that the theo- 
logians of the early Church were able to withstand their rationalising 
opponents, even when supported by the imperial government. It 
is much to be regretted that the laity of the Christian Church are 
apt to neglect the study of its early struggles in the defence of its 
truths. Surely some acquaintance with the history of the Christian 
" dogma," the accepted teaching of the Christian Church, is neces- 
sary to every educated man. " The Arian controversy differed from 
all modern controversies on like subjects by the extremely abstract 
region within which it was confined. Arius was led to adopt his 
peculiar theory from a fancied necessity arising out of the terms 
Father and Son, as if these terms, used through the imperfection of 
language to designate distinctions in the unity of the divine nature, 
implied what is implied when used in relation to man. It was the 
excess of dogmatism founded upon the most abstract words, in the 
most abstract reign of human thought." The fears of the orthodox 
party were deepened by the danger lest the Arian view should lead 
to a recognition of two Gods, and thus lead to the revival of the old 
polytheism. In this fierce and long-continued controversy the great 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A. D. 161 

Athanasius, fighting for the truth " contra mundum," has extorted 
the admiration of Gibbon. Dr. Newman remarks that " Athanasius 
stands out more grandly in Gibbon than in the pages of the orthodox 
ecclesiastical historians .... and, as if to show how much insight 
depends upon sympathy, Gibbon is immediately more just and open to 
the merits of the Christian community than he has been hitherto. He 
now sees that the privileges of the Church had already revived a sense of 
order and freedom in the Roman government." l There have been 
men in high places who in the Houses of Parliament have unneces- 
sarily exposed their ignorance of history in their ridicule of the 
phraseology of the Nicene Creed and the words used in this contro- 
versy homoousian and homoiousian, the catch-words, the one of the 
orthodox, the other of the Arian party, as if the question in dispute 
were " the mere theology of a syllable." It is a pleasure to quote 
from a high authority the deserved rebuke, "This technical language 
of theology has not been a gratuitous invention of ingenious divines, 
but a necessary development of thought. Each phrase is a record 
of some fierce controversy which had to be fought, if dogmatic 
truth was to be preserved." 2 The heresy of Arius was the occasion 
of the convening the first general council by Constantine at Nice, 
325 A.D., in which the views of Arius were condemned. These 
general councils were "the pitched battles of ecclesiastical history;" 
that of Nice consisted of above three hundred bishops from every 
province of the Roman world, a full and fair representation of the 
theological learning of the age and of the ability of the clergy. 
The second general council (the first of Constantinople), called by 
Theodosius the Great, condemned the opinions of those who 
impugned the divinity of the Holy Spirit, 380 A.D. The persecu- 
tions of the Christian Church by the heathen emperors had called 
forth "the Noble Army of Martyrs," whose existence and noble 
self-sacrifice would remain unnoticed and forgotten except for the 
reference to them in the Te Deum in the service of the Anglican 
Church. It is very singular that most Christians shrink from the 
contemplation of the sufferings endured by men and women of old 
for Christ's sake. Perhaps their sacrifices are felt as a reproach to 
our ease and slothfulness. It is, however, well to remember, that 
among the thousands who faced death in the amphitheatre, by wild 
beasts or by the sword of the executioner, or by lingering tortures, 
there are to be found ladies of refinement and high family, as Perpetua 
and her companions in Africa in the reign of Caracalla. Justin 

1 Morison's " Life of Gibbon," p. 127. 2 Spectator. 8 Stanley. 

If 



1 62 To the Final Division of the 

Martyr (the philosopher) died for Christ 150 A.D. ; Polycarp, 166 
A.D. The massacres at Lyons and Vienne took place under the 
philosophic and humane Marcus Aurelius ; and Cyprian, the Bishop 
of Carthage, suffered 257 A.D., under Valerian. The highly-coloured 
statements and fables, which in the course of time have been per- 
mitted to disguise the history of these honoured martyrs, should not 
be allowed to lessen our reverence for the memory of the men and 
women who died for Christ. The persecution under Decius, 249 
A.D., drove Paul the Hermit with others into the deserts of Thebais. 
After this, Anthony, Pachomius, and others, 305 A.D. An anchoret 
or monastic life arose, and was favoured in the East by the genial 
taste for a dreary contemplative existence. Hilarion established 
monasteries in Palestine, 328 A.D., and so by degrees over Europe. 
However useful monastic institutions may have been in the troublous 
times which accompanied the decline and fall of the empire, the 
experience of centuries led to their discouragement in Europe by 
Catholic sovereigns as well as by Protestant legislation. Many of the 
corruptions of Christianity and the absurd monstrosities of men like 
Symon the Stylite are traceable to the idiotic fancies of monks. 
Many of the monastic institutions in Europe were, however, for a 
time, the sanctuaries of learning and the vanguards of Christian 
civilisation, examples of learning and of labour in agricultural 
improvements to them be all honour. In the East they have not 
been remarkable for their literary utility, or, in fact, for anything 
except a lazy, ignorant indolence ; and their existence at this time is 
one of the hindrances in the way of the resurrection of genuine 
Christianity in Turkey and the East. 

9. The outward form of the churches, as represented in their 
ministers and congregations, was at first of necessity congregational, 
the pastor being the bishop ; but there was no isolation from the 
corporate body, the Church of Christ. Meetings of ministers 
naturally required a chairman. When some minister, from the 
superior importance of the Church over which he presided or from 
the possession of special talent, acquired a superior position as a 
centre of union, he became the bishop, and the title, at first common 
to all ministers, was confined to the perpetual president. These 
bishops became powers in their respective cities. "Thus there 
shaped itself a hierarchy of patriarchs, metropolitans, and bishops 
(after the model of the imperial arrangements in the provinces), 
their jurisdiction, although spiritual, enforced by the law of the 
state, their provinces and dioceses usually corresponding to the 
administrative divisions of the empire. As no patriarch yet enjoyed 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 163 

more than an honorary supremacy, the head of the Church, so 
far as she could be said to have a head, was virtually the emperor 
himself. The clergy .... were well pleased to see him preside in 
councils, issue edicts against heresy, and testify, even by arbitrary 
measures, his zeal for the advancement of the faith and the over- 
throw of pagan rites. But, though the tone of the Church remained 
humble, her strength waxed greater ; nor were there occasions want- 
ing which revealed the future that was in store for her. The 
resistance and final triumph of Athanasius proved that the new society 
could put forth a power of opinion such as had never been known 
before ; the abasement of Theodosius before Ambrose, the Arch- 
bishop of Milan, admitted the supremacy of spiritual authority. 
In the decrepitude of old institutions, it was to the Church that the 
life and feelings of the people sought more and more to attach 
themselves ; and when, in the fifth century, the horizon grew black 
with clouds of ruin, those who watched with despair and apathy the 
approach of irresistible foes, fled for comfort to the shrine of a 
religion which even those foes revered." l A work, entitled " The 
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles," has been discovered by the Greek 
Bishop of Constantinople in 1883. It is referred to by Eusebius, 
Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius, &c. The date of its composition is 
fixed at 100 or 1 10 A.D. The light thrown on the poverty and simple 
arrangement of the early Church, especially in remote and poor dis- 
tricts, is very interesting. The evangelists, called also prophets 
(teachers), seem to have exercised as itinerant overseers the power, 
given to Titus to set in order the affairs of the Churches and to 
ordain elders. To these evangelists the title of apostles was given ; the 
elders were called bishops, who, with their deacons, were the chosen 
of their several congregations. " The tone of the directions implies 
an age of poverty and simplicity, when a man was to be regarded as 
a false prophet if he asked for money, or if, being a wandering 
missionary, he stayed in hospitable quarters on the second day." a 
In Rome, the reputed see of St. Peter, the bishop held a position 
of peculiar dignity, through the grandeur of Rome itself. So 
desirable was the position, that in the contest for the elections of 
Damascus, 366 A.D., a fight occurred between the excited partisans 
in which 137 lives were lost; the luxury and outward state of the 
bishop and others called forth the severe criticism and sarcasm of 
pagan critics, who forget that these disasters originated in the 

1 Bryce, pp. n, 12. 

2 "Expositor," second series, No. xli. pp. 374-392, by Canon Farrar. 

M 2 



1 64 To the Final Division of the 

interference of the Arian emperor with the elections. But the 
claim of the Popes to a superior position over the Church at large, 
indirectly made by Victor 196 A.D., and by Julius, 347 A.D., were 
quietly but effectually checked for the time. By the interference of the 
secular power the first capital punishment for heresy was inflicted on 
Priscillian, in Gaul, under the rule of the usurper Maximus, at 
Treves, 385 A.D. This act was strongly condemned by St. Martin 
of Tours, and the two persecutors were deprived of their bishoprics. 
Notions of the sanctity of celibacy, especially among the clergy, 
gradually grew. The Montanists are said to have professed a 
peculiar sanctity, and the possession of a large amount of spiritual 
insight and power. They were, probably, for the most part sincere, 
but strict, professors of Christianity, though some of them may have 
yielded to fanatical impulses. The Donatist schism in north Africa, 
which commenced 311 A.D., and lasted two hundred years, arose out 
-of the violent attempts to enforce a rigorous discipline towards such 
.as had been compromised in times of persecution. By both ot 
these sects the peace and prosperity of the Church was interrupted ; 
as also by the Meletian schism, which lasted from 325 A.D. to the 
end of the century. It is to be feared that the superstition and 
laxity regarding truth, which lingered among many of the Christian 
-converts, exercised too great an influence over many of the bishops 
and clergy. The histories handed down to us of the discovery 
of the remains of martyrs in Milan lessen our confidence in St. 
Ambrose, the brave bishop of Milan. This feeling influenced 
Helvidius, Jovinian, and Vigilantius to oppose these superstitions, 
together with the false notions of peculiar purity attached to celibacy, 
which the Council of Illiberis, 303 A.D., had countenanced. Pope 
Siricius, the successor of Damasus, denied the validity of clerical 
marriages, though up to the eleventh century the clergy were 
generally refractory on this point, and St. Jerome is violent in his 
attacks upon Vigilantius and others. The toleration of paganism 
was not likely to continue, when professed Christians had no tolera- 
tion for each other. In 384 A.D., they refused any outward mark 
of respect to the altar and statue of Victory in spite of the pleadings 
of Symmachus ; and this refusal of any signs of respect to the 
tutelary divinities in the public ceremonies marked the abandon- 
ment of all connexion with paganism on the part of the government 
of the Roman empire. 

10. THE LITERATURE OF THIS PERIOD was the Latin and Greek of 
the old paganism, and the new Christian literature, for the most part 
Greek. After the Augustan age there was a great decline in the 



Roman Empire by TJieodcsius, 395 A.D. 165 

literature of the age, especially between the rule of Marcus Aurelius, 
161 A.D., and Valerian, 253 A.D. There is not a single writer in this 
period who can be called a poet, but many lawyers, antiquarians, 
and rhetoricians. Latin literature had almost ceased to exist ; even 
the meditations of an emperor are in Greek. Athens, Tarsus in 
Cilicia, and Marseilles were favourite places of study for the youth 
of the higher classes. Books were generally accessible, being com- 
paratively cheap from the facilities afforded by cheap educated slave 
labour, through which copies could be multiplied by dictation to a 
large extent. In Rome there was a sheet circulated the "Acta 
Diurna" a sort of government gazette. In Spain, Gaul, and 
Britain, Latin literature was eagerly cultivated. In the East, though 
the Latin was the language of the officials, yet neither the language 
nor the literature of Rome found much acceptance. Even in Rome, 
Greek was more generally spoken than Latin. The names of the 
leading authors are all that can be given in this brief compendium, 
(i) The poets : Ovid, 14 A.D. ; Phasdrus, 14 A.D. ; Lucan, Persius, 
Silius Italicus, 54-68 A.D. ; Martial, 66-104 A.D. ; Statius, 81-96 A.D. ; 
Juvenal, 98-117 A.D. ; Petronius, 161-180 A.D. ; Ausonius and 
Claudian, 380 A.D. (2) The historians : Livy, 14 A.D. ; Valerius Pater- 
culus and Valerius Maximus, 14-17 A.D. ; Tacitus and Suetonius, 
Floras, 98-117 A.D. ; Josephus the Jew, 38-97 A.D. ; Plutarch, 
105-140 A.D. ; Arrian, 103-150 A.D. ; Pausanias, 125-176 A.D. ; 
Justin, Quintus Curtius, 138-161 A.D. ; Appian, 130-147 A.D. ; 
Herodian and Dio Cassius, 180-238 A.D.; Diogenes Laertius, 
200-222 A.D. ; ^Elian, 222-250 A.D. ; Aurelius Victor and Eutropius, 
360 A.D. ; Ammianus Marcellinus, 390 A.D. ; besides the Augustan 
Memoirs and others. (3) The geographers and scientific writers: 
Strabo, 21-25 A - D - '> Pomponius Mela and Columella (agriculture), 
41-54 A.D. ; Pliny the Elder (an encyclopsediac work), 60-79 A>D - > 
Ptolemy (the founder of the Ptolemian astronomical system, which 
ruled until superseded by Copernicus in the fifteenth century), 
126-161 A.D. ; add to these Celsus (the opponent of Christianity 
who introduced the writings of the ancient Hippocrates into Rome), 
15-20 A.D. ; and Galen, the celebrated physician, 150 A.D. (4) The 
legalists and jurisprudents: Capito, 14 A.D. ; Labeo, 14-42 A.D. ; 
Sabinus, 25-50 A.D. ; Scsevola, 138-161 A.D. ; Salvius Julianus, 
130-148 A.D. ; Gaius, 150 A.D. ; Papinian, 180-212 A.D. ; Ulpian, 
210-228 A.D. ; there was a legal school at Berytus until the sixth 
century. (5) The orators, and sophists, and satirists: Quintilian, 
69-118 A.D. ; Dion Chrysostom, 50-117 A.D. ; Apuleius (satirist and 
romancer), 161-180 A.D. ; Lucian (satirist), 165-182 A.D. ; Longinus 



1 66 To the Final Division of the 

(orator), 213-273 A.D. ; Philostratus (sophist), 182-237 A.D. ; Libanius 
(sophist), 346-395 A.D. ; Symmachus (orator), 380 A.D. (6) The 
moralists, &c. : L. Annseus Seneca (Stoic), 41-65 A.D. ; M. Annseus 
Seneca (rhetorician), 14-37 A.D. ; Epictetus, 90-125 A.D. ; Marcus 
Aurelius, 161-180 A.D. ; Babrius (^Esop's fables) in the first century; 
Pliny, junior, 98-117 A.D. ; Lettus and Aulus Gellius (miscellaneous), 
138-161 A.D. ; (7) The philosophic writers: Philo the Jew and 
Apion, 20-40 A.D. ; Apuleius (a Platonic), 150 A.D. ; Ammonius 
Saccus (eclectic), 175-250^0. ; Plotinus, 230-270 A.D. ; lamblichus, 
309-329 A.D. ; Porphyry, 249-305 A.D. ; were of the new Platonic 
school. The Emperor Julian, 363 A.D. Both heathen and Christian 
literature were influenced more or less by the fashionable eclectic 
Neo-Platonic philosophy. It traced all things back to the Absolute 
One (not a theistical, but a pantheistical, deity) ; it rejected all 
objective revelation. Man could only be brought to a saving know- 
ledge of God by a subjective intuition, called the ecstasy wherein 
man's soul (the subject) and the absolute (the object) are so united 
as to lose their personal identity. This state is attainable by 
asceticism and contemplation (to which was added later magic rites). 
The Neo-Platonic trinity consisted of the reason, the soul, and 
the Absolute One, inexpressible and inconceivable, from whom all 
things are derived by radiation, &c., &c. Neo-Platonism accepted 
the religious conceptions of all nations as far as suited its system. 
It was the creed of philosophers lifted in their conceit above the 
vulgar crowd and despising the illiterate. It is obvious how such a 
system, which imposed no obligations, and which had no proof but 
a man's own fancies, would suit the minds dissatisfied with the vulgar 
polytheism, and not disposed to accept the teachings and respon- 
sibilities of Christianity. Neo-Platonism represents a mode of 
thought which may be traced through various creeds and ages, 
resting on a deeply-seated belief that we possess foundations of know- 
ledge beyond the mere senses. Lecky thinks that the philosophical 
systems, as modified by the Platonic and the Egyptian Oriental 
schools, helped to effect a great religious reform among many in the 
pagan world by the revival of religious reverence, the inculcation of 
humility, prayer, and purity of thought, and by accustoming men to 
associate their moral ideals with the deity rather than with them- 
selves. 1 Its philosophy " affirmed that to know is to be, and the 
Neo-Platonists maintained the potential omniscience of mind .... 
and at length the virtual omniscience of spirits. Thus was taught 

1 Lecky, " History of Christian Morals," vol. i. p. 396. 



Roman Empire by Theodosius, 395 A.D. 167 

by Plotinus, says M. Matter, the learned historian of the Alexandrian 
school, * the famous system of the identity of being and thought, 
the greatest temerity of our age ; ' thus was the Platonic realism 
carried to its utmost height, and as thus developed it stood forth, 
like its modem duplicate, the * German realism,' as either a naked 
absurdity, or express and complete pantheism. Plotinus thought 
that the reason, of which each man is conscious, is not a faculty of 
the individual soul, but a ray or flash of the universal reason .... 
at once common and particular ; diffused through the universe, and 
yet entire in each soul, in each life, in each impulse, in each act." l 
The leading Christian writers were the early apostolical fathers, 
Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp ; also Justin Martyr, Tatian, Irenseus 
(140-180 A.D.), Tertullian (167-180 A.D.) in the second century; 
Clement of Alexandria, Origen (whose " Hexapla " remain in 
part a proof of his learning and piety), Hippolytus of Portus, Cyprian 
of Carthage, in the third century ; with Arnobius, Lactantius, Hilary 
of Poitiers, Eusebius of Csesarea, Gregory of Nazianzen (355-390 A.D.), 
Basil of Csesarea, Cappadocia (355-380 A.D.), Athanasius of 
Alexandria, Ambrose of Milan, Ephrem Syrus, in the fourth century. 
The literary merit of the writings of the Christian fathers is, at least, 
fully equal to that of their Greek and Latin contemporaries in the 
second, third, and fourth centuries. In learning and research there 
are no pagan writers of their age equal to Irenaeus, Eusebius, 
Hippolytus, and Origen ; Donatus, the grammarian (about 333 A.D.), 
and Servius, grammarian (390-400 A.D.). 



State of the World, 395 A.D. 

EUROPE. 

THE ROMAN EMPIRE contained all of Europe bounded on the east 
by the Rhine and south of the Danube, also England, Wales, 
and the south of Scotland. Ireland and the north of Scotland 
- remained in their primitive state. 

THE BARBARIAN world, east of the Rhine, consisted of Germanic 
and Sclavonian tribes, the Germans especially pressing into 
the Roman territories in Gaul, Rhaetia, and Pannonia ; and 

1 London Quarterly Revieiv, vol. xv. pp. 589, 590, by Dr. Rigg. 



1 68 To the Final Division of the Roman Empire by Thedosius. 

south of the Danube the Goths, driven by the Huns, 
occupied Mcesia. Beyond, in the far east, were a large 
number of barbarian tribes, Huns Bulgarians, Alani, Avars, 
Magyars, &c. ready to follow in the wake of the Sclavonians 
and the Huns. 

SCANDINAVIA was occupied by the Gothic races, the ancestors of the 
present Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes. 



ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR to the Euphrates and Syria were under the Roman 
empire. 

THE PERSIANS overturned the Parthian power 226 A.D., and founded 
the dynasty of the Sassanidse, which occupied the place of 
the old Persian empire, of which it professed to be a revival. 

INDIA troubled and divided by the Brahmin and Buddhist contests. 

CHINA divided into several independent states. 

JAPAN under the Mikados rapidly driving the Aionos northward. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT and North Africa under the Roman empire. 

ETHIOPIA and Abyssinia under petty barbarous chiefs of whom 
nothing is known. Christianity was introduced into Abyssinia 
by Frumentius about 330 A.D. 



SIXTH PERIOD, 



From the Division of the Empire to the 
Revival of the Empire of the West by 
Charlemagne, 800 A .D. 



FOR the sake of perspicuity the narrative follows the history (i) of 
the Western Empire to its end in 476 A.D., then (2) the settlement of 
the barbarous conquerors in the new nationalities Gaul, Spain, 
Britain, North Africa, and lastly in Italy itself; (3) the nature and 
character of these barbarian invasions ; (4) the affairs of the Eastern- 
Empire up to the Saracenic invasion; (5) the rise and progress of the 
Mahometan Saracens ; (6) the rise of the empire of the German 
Franks under Charlemagne ; (7) the Eastern Empire to the time of 
Charlemagne; (8) Scandinavia and the eastern plains north and 
west of the Black Sea and the Danube; (9) the ecclesiastical history; 
(10) the literary history of this period. 

2. (i) The Western Empire lingered outwardly for eighty-one 
years. Stilicho, a Vandal, married to Serena, a niece of Theodosius,, 
ably governed under the child Honorius (aged eleven years), who 
remained all his life " a crowned nothingness." The rivalries of 
Stilicho with Rufinus, the guardian of Arcadius (Emperor of the 
East), led to an estrangement on the part of the two empires, which 
lasted to 408 A.D., though Rufinus himself fell by a conspiracy in 
395 A.D. The first step which led to the dissolution of the Western 
Empire was taken by Alaric, the commander of the Visigothic feder- 
ate troops (" fcedorati," holding lands on military tenure), under the 
late Theodosius, who, knowing the feebleness of the two successors, 
of Theodosius and the comparative inefficiency of their military forces,, 
and proud of the willing allegiance of a nation of warriors, disdained 
to remain in a subordinate position. In accordance with the usages 



170 From tJu Division of the Empire to the 

of his forefathers, the Visigothic warriors raised him upon a buckler 
and held him aloft in the sight of all men as their newly-chosen king, 
395 A.D. Alaric and his people had already adopted the Arian form 
of the Christian faith, and, with all the faults as well as the virtues of a 
semi-civilised people, were the first to begin to lay the foundation of 
the new nationalities which were to raise their heads above " the 
level waste of the Oriental despotism and effete civilisation of the 
Roman empire." The new king, taking counsel with his people, 
decided to carve out for themselves new kingdoms rather than 
through " sloth to continue the subjects of others." l In one or two 
expeditions Alaric first plundered Greece and the Peloponnesus; but, 
when the united armies of the East and West under Stilicho were 
about to attack him, the Eastern emperor, fearing the power of 
Stilicho more than that of Alaric, commanded Stilicho to desist from 
the further prosecution of the war, and to withdraw with the legions 
of the West within the boundaries of the Western Empire, 395 A.D. 
Next year, however, Stilicho cleared Greece from its Gothic invaders, 
but permitted Alaric and his army to escape from Arcadia and to 
retire with his plunder northward, through Epirus, 396 A.D. " There 
was danger for Rome in driving Alaric to desperation. There was 
danger privately for Stilicho if the dead Alaric should render him no 
longer indispensable." 2 The " sublime cowardice " of the Eastern 
emperor rewarded the rebellion of Alaric, by appointing him 
" Master-general of Illyricum," and for four years " the Visigothic 
king was using the forms of Roman law, the machinery of Roman taxa- 
tion, the almost unbounded authority of a Roman provincial governor, 
to prepare the weapon which was one day to pierce the heart of Rome 
itself." 3 In the year 400 A.D., Alaric appears to have formed an 
alliance with Radagasius, supposed to have been an Ostrogoth chief, 
a recent emigrant from the Euxine, a savage idolater filled with 
special hatred towards Roman civilisation. Radagasius invaded 
Rhsetia, while Alaric besieged the Emperor Honorius in Milan. 
Stilicho drove back Radagasius and then defeated Alaric at Pollentia 
(near Turin), 402 A.D., prudently, however, entering into a treaty 
with him ; for such was the necessity of the empire that Stilicho was 
compelled to withdraw some of the legions from Britain and the 
Rhine, and thus left the frontier too weak to resist the barbarians 
who were ready to enter Gaul. Radagasius, with 200,000 men, 
again invaded Italy, passing through Lombardy into Tuscany by the 

1 Jornandes, quoted by Hodgkin, vol. i. p. 251. 

2 Hodgkin, " History of Italy," vol. i. p. 257. 3 Ibid., vol. i. p. 259. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 171 

route of the Apennines, where he was defeated, his army dispersed, 
and himself beheaded by Stilicho, 405-6 A.D. Court intrigues and 
the jealousy of Stilicho's alliance with Alaric led to the murder 
of Stilicho at Ravenna, by order of Honorius, 23 Aug., 408 A.D. 
This jealousy of Stilicho was probably increased by the great bar- 
barian irruption across the Rhine into Gaul, 31 December, 406 A.D., 
the beginning of the permanent settlement of the barbarians in West 
Europe and North Africa. Though opposed by the Franks (on the 
north-east frontier), who were the friends and allies of the empire, 
the Vandals, the Alani, and Suevi over-ran Gaul. The Vandals and 
others passed through, after three years, across the Pyrenees into 
Spain, while the Burgundians, 60,000 in number, were permitted to 
occupy Eastern Gaul. The brutal conduct of the Roman legionaries 
towards the Gothic auxiliaries immediately after the death of Stilicho 
deprived the empire of the help of 30,000 brave soldiers who, 
maddened by the massacre of their wives and children, repaired to 
Alaric, crying for vengeance on their assassins, 408 A.D. Alaric 
crossed the Julian Alps, passed on towards Rome. Thrice Rome 
was threatened, and at length (24 Aug., 410 A.D.) was captured 
and plundered with great slaughter. In their alarm the Romans had 
put to death Serena, the widow of Stilicho, and the pagan party had 
partially renewed pagan rites and worship ; but in the great carnage 
the influence of Christianity over the conqueror was displayed the 
churches were places of refuge, and the city was not materially injured. 
The news of this event spread alarm and terror through the Roman 
world. St. Jerome, in his cell at Bethlehem, was busied with his 
Commentary on Ezekiel, when suddenly " a terrible rumour from the 
West was brought to him," which filled him with grief and conster- 
nation. St. Augustine, in North Africa, " aroused by the mistakes 
of some, and the blasphemies of others," began his great work on the 
" City of God," as a vindication of Christianity from the charge of hav- 
ing caused the fall of Rome. Within a week after the capture of the 
city, Alaric, with the spoil and a long train of captives, passed through 
Campania and Calabria, intending to sail from Reggio to attack Africa, 
the granary of Rome ; he died, however, at Cosenza, from the effects 
of the climate, and was buried in the bed of a river, Basento. 

3. Adolphus (Ataulfus), the successor of Alaric, was attached 
to the Roman civilisation, and in love with Galla Placidia, the 
daughter of the great Theodosius, and therefore disposed to act in 
unison with the court of Honorius. In 412 A.D. he left Italy and 
took possession of Southern Gaul, putting down several usurpers who 
aimed at the power of the empire, five in number, and then earned 



172 From the Division of the Empire to the 

the hand of Galla Placidia, in 414 A.D. His murder by a servant 
restored Galla Placidia to her family, by whom she was married to 
Constantius, the favourite and colleague of Honorius, 417 A.D. 
Constantius died 421 A.D., Honorius 422 AD. Valentinian III., the 
son of Constantius and Galla Placidia, succeeded, under the guardian- 
ship of his mother. The rivalry of ^Etius and Boniface, men who were 
the support of the empire, which was the result of the envy of a fac- 
tion in the court, led to the loss of North Africa, through the invasion 
of the Vandals from Spain, invited by Boniface, 429 A.D. Placidia 
died 450 A.D. " Her love for Ataulfus, her grief at his death, &c., 
point her out as the one sweetest and purest figure of that dreary 
time." 1 The year after her death Italy and the West had to suffer 
the calamity, of all the greatest, the ravages of the Huns. These 
barbarians, having occupied the territory in which the Goths had 
formerly settled, along the Euxine to the Danube, had established 
their rule to the north-east over Hungary and the neighbourhood, 
and over all the Teutonic and Sclavonic tribes from the Elbe to the 
Wolga, the chief seat of their ruler being at Tokay or Buda. 
They had made occasional inroads upon the Eastern Empire, 
and had received from Theodosius II. an annual payment of 
; 1 4,000 sterling. Large numbers had served as auxiliaries in the 
armies of the empire, and had profited by their discipline. But in 
447 A.D. Attila, sole monarch of the Huns, ravaged the country to 
the south of the Danube up to the walls of Constantinople, exacted 
^240,000 as the arrears of tribute, and tripled the amount of the annual 
payment to ^84,000. Unable, however, to make any impression on 
the strongly-fortified and all but impregnable city of Constantinople, 
Attila contemplated the invasion of the West, sending first to each of 
the two emperors a Gothic messenger with the insulting order, 
" Attila, thy master and mine, bids thee to prepare a palace for his re- 
ception." Thus for several years the great Hun remained " hovering 
like a hawk over the fluttered dovecots of Byzantium and Ravenna, 
and enjoying the terror of the Eastern and Western Augustus alter- 
nately." z By an alliance with Genseric, king of the Vandals, Attila 
hoped to attack the empire on the south in the Mediterranean, while, 
by one of the Frankish chiefs, he expected Prankish assistance in his 
invasion of Gaul. Genseric, however, was not ready, and Attila was 
left to his own resources. In 451 A.D. his huge army of Huns, of 
Sclavonic tribes from the East of Russia, and of the Teutonic tribes in 
Germany, moved onward. It is very probable that the inroads of this 

1 Hodgkin, "History of Italy," vol. i. p. 468. 2 Ibid., vol. ii. p. ill. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 173 

army upon North Germany hastened the emigration of the Anglo- 
Saxon tribes to England. Metz was taken and burnt, Paris was 
threatened, but, by the wisdom of JEtius, the governor of Roman 
Gaul, who had conciliated the Franks, the Visigoths, the Burgundians, 
and the Armoricians, all these warlike barbarians united with the 
Roman forces in opposition to Attila. A great battle was fought at 
Chalons (or rather at Mery-sur-Seine) in which, after the slaughter ot 
162,000, Attila was checked, and found it expedient to retreat through 
Germany towards Hungary. Europe was saved from the degradation 
of a Hunnish Calmuck settlement, and secured for the permanent 
occupation of a Teutonic race. This victory was the last that adorned 
the annals of Rome. "If the empire of the Huns had spread over Gaul 
and the temperate regions of Europe, the Huns might have adopted 
the agricultural life, but the vices of the race, stamped upon it by 
servitude, would have been perpetuated as they have been in Russia, 
as they have been wherever Tartars have ruled. It is indeed with 
wonder and admiration that we contemplate the most formidable 
power which ever affrighted the world dashed to pieces against the 
last ruins of an ancient civilisation." * But Attila soon recovered 
from the losses of his Gallic invasion, and in 452 A.D. invaded Italy, 
destroyed the city of Aquileia, and caused that emigration from the 
cities of the Po which led to the foundation of Venice, near the 
mouth of the Po. The consternation of Rome and Ravenna was 
extreme. Even ^Etius despaired. The Romans in Italy had hoped 
that the dissensions of their barbarian invaders would sooner or later 
bring them to submit to the imperial rule ; and now to find an Alaric 
followed by an Attila was to them a severe disappointment. To the 
site now occupied by Peschiara an embassy was sent from Valen- 
tinian III. and the people of Rome, headed by Pope Leo I. 
Attila was shaken in his determination to attack Rome the fear 
lest, succeeding as Alaric, his success might, as in Alaric's case, be 
followed by his death. He contemplated also the possibility of the 
arrival of the armies which yEtius on the one hand, and Marcian, the 
Eastern Emperor, on the other, were preparing to lead against him, 
so that he yielded to the intercession of Leo, and Rome was saved. 
Attila visited Ravenna as a friend, and soon after died suddenly in 
his Pannonian home, 453 A.D. His empire fell to pieces after the 
Battle of Netad, 454 A.D., in which the Teutonic races were con- 
querors, and free to act on their own account against the empire. 
^Etius was now no longer necessary to Valentinian III., and he 

1 Sismondi, " Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. p. 170. 



From the Division of the Empire to the 

was accordingly assassinated in the palace (as Stilicho had been), 
at the close of the year 454 A.D. He was called " the last of the 
Romans," and had retarded the extinction of Roman rule for thirty 
years. In March, 455 A.D., the emperor was assassinated in the 
campus martius, and the family of Theodosius the Great was extinct. 
Maximus, an elder senator, succeeded, and forced the widow of 
Valentinian to marry him. She invited the Vandals under Genseric. 
On the day the Vandal fleet appeared off Ostia, 2 1 June, Maximus 
was murdered by the domestics of the palace. On the third day 
after the death of Maximus, Genseric and his yellow-haired Vandal 
giants appeared at the gates of Rome, ready, as he said, " to destroy 
the city with which God was angry." Through the intercession of 
Pope Leo I., Genseric was content with being allowed without resist- 
ance to plunder the city fourteen days. The gold, the silver, and 
the copper were taken from the palaces and the churches, and all 
the treasures that could be discovered in the possession of the inhabit- 
ants were taken away, but Rome itself was uninjured. The empress 
and her daughters, with a large number of captives (sixty thousand), 
were carried to Africa. 

4. The history of the nominal emperors from this time is a very 
pitiful one. Raised, ruled, and deposed by the generals of the bar- 
barian mercenaries, they were the mere puppets of the day. The 
patrician Ricimer, a Swabian (Suevian) by birth, son of the daughter 
of Wallia, King of the Visigoths, not daring himself to assume the 
purple, was the creator of these " phantom emperors," and, disdain- 
ing to obey those whom he considered as his own creatures, displaced 
them before they were well seated on the throne. Avitus, a noble 
Roman of Auvergne, succeeded Maximus. " He was the key-stone 
of a great and important political combination (which, had it endured, 
would certainly have changed the face of Europe, and might have 
anticipated the empire of Charles the Great) in favour of a nobler 
nature than the Frank, and without the interposition of three centuries 
of barbarism." 1 This was to be accomplished by an alliance with the 
Burgundians, and the Visigoths of Gaul and Spain, by which the Suevi 
of Spain should be subdued, and the influence and territory of the 
Goths and Burgundians should be largely extended in Gaul. This 
scheme was naturally opposed to the views of Ricimer (a Suevian\ 
and Avitus was deposed 456 A.D. Majorianus, his successor displayed 
some warlike activity, but was deposed 460 A.D. Libius Servius died 
465 A.D. Authenius, son-in-law of the Emperor Marcian, and the 

1 Hodgkin, " History of Italy," vol. ii. p. 395. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 175 

father-in-law of Ricimer, was beheaded, after a brief civil war, by 
Gundobad, the brother of Ricimer. Five months after, Ricimer him- 
self died, 472 A.D. Gundobad appointed Olybius, who died 
472 A.D., then Glycerins, who was dethroned by Nepos, supported 
by the power of the Eastern Empire, Gundobad retiring to Bur- 
gundy, 474 A.D. Orestes, a Roman who had been employed by 
Attila in embassies to the empire, had become influential enough 
with the soldiery to dethrone Nepos, and place his son Augustulus, a 
child, on the throne by the name of Romulus Augustulus, 476 A.D. 
The Vandal foedorati, who had long served in the Roman armies, 
which now were filled with barbarians of all nations, demanded of 
Orestes one-third of the land of Italy. This demand being refused, 
Odoaker, the Herulian, was proclaimed king. Orestes was taken 
prisoner at Placentia, and beheaded, 28 August, 476 A.D. The child 
Augustulus was spared, and spent his life in comfort in Campania, 
with a pension of ,3,600 a year. So ended the Western Empire, 
acknowledged as such, up to the last day of its existence, by Gaul, 
Spain, Britain, North Africa, and Italy. We must keep in mind the 
fact that since the time of Alexander Severus and Probus, 222 to 
276 A.D., there had been large accessions of a barbarian population 
into the empire, and that the armies of the empire were mainly com- 
posed of them. "The question is whether Rome was conquered by 
the barbarians in the ordinary sense of the word conquered ? We 
know it was not .... the fact that the struggle lay between bar- 
barians who were within and friendly to the empire, and barbarians 
who were without it, and hostile rather to their more fortunate 
brethren than to the empire which employed them, is implicitly 
involved in Gibbon's narrative, but it is not explicitly brought out. 
Romanised Goths, Vandals, and Franks, were the only defenders of 
the empire against other tribes and nations who were not 
Romanised." x The Burgundians, before their entrance into Gaul, 
had made themselves masters of the more useful arts of civilised 
life, and when settled in their territory behaved kindly and liberally 
to the Romanised Gauls. 

5. (2) The settlement of the barbarians in the new nationalities, 
GAUL was the first of the western provinces occupied by the Teutonic 
hordes from Germany. The great migration (31 December, 406 A.D.) 
of the Alans, Suevi, and Vandals, though opposed by the FRANKISH 
tribes already (as the allies of Rome) settled in the north-east of 
Gaul, was a successful one. These savage tribes never returned 

1 Morison "Gibbon," p. 132. 



176 From the Division of tlie Empire to the 

beyond the Rhine, but ravaged Gaul for more than three years, and 
then passed the Pyrenees into Spain. Meanwhile, as already related, 
the BURGUNDIANS, by permission, settled in the east of Gaul, sixty 
thousand in number, occupying from the lake of Geneva to the 
junction of the Moselle and the Rhine, their chief towns being 
Lyons, Geneva, Basle, and Autun. After this, Ataulfus, king of the 
VISIGOTHS, by the good-will of the Western Empire, took possession 
of southern Gaul, as already related. After the defeat of Attila at 
Chalons 451 A.D., in which the Franks took their share, as allies of 
the Roman ^Etius, with the Burgundians and Visigoths, the Franks 
appear to have occupied the territory of Gaul to the Seine. The 
Roman Syagrius, after the assassination of ^Etius, governed the 
districts around the Oise, Somme, Marne, and Seine. The Armo- 
ricians (ancient Gauls) occupied Bretagne. The union of Gaul was 
at last effected by the FRANKS under Clovis and his successors, 
Syagrius was conquered 486 A.D. The Armoricians became tribu- 
tary 497 A.D. The Gothic territory was much limited, and in 534 A.D. 
Burgundy was added to the Frankish kingdom, as was the rest of 
Gothic Gaul, 538 A.D. All what is now called France was then 
nominally united under the Franks of the Merovingian dynasty. 
The kings of this dynasty divided France among their children six 
times between the years 511-687 A.D., when the defeat of the 
Neustrian (western) Franks by the Austrasians under Pepin d'Heristal, 
mayor of the palace, gave the preponderance to Teutonic (Austrasian) 
over Roman (Neustrian) Gaul. These divisions appear to have been 
based on military considerations. The race of Clovis had become 
so physically and morally degraded that all the powers of govern- 
ment were exercised by Pepin and his descendants. Pepin esta- 
blished the seat of government at He'ristal on the Meuse or at 
Cologne, and re-established the ancient national institutions, espe- 
cially the Malluna, the annual assembly of the nobles in the spring. 
At this meeting the Merovingian king presided in person, being con- 
veyed in a car drawn by oxen. He was clothed in regal robes, his 
long hair and beard floating to the wind, and opened the assembly 
on a throne of gold. He received ambassadors, and gave the 
answers as directed by the real king, the maire du palais. This 
being done, the king (roi faineant) was re-conveyed to his villa of 
Maumagues (between Compiegne and Noyon), to be there guarded 
as a dignified but secluded king. In the civil wars, which had 
ended in the battle of Testry 687 A.D., the Germanic Frisians, the 
Alemanni and Suevians in Suabia, and other minor peoples, had 
made themselves independent of Frankish authority, but were soon 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 177 

compelled to submit to the authority of Pepin. To this family it 
is owing that Central Europe is German, and not Romanised or 
Sclavonicised. 

SPAIN. The barbarian Vandals, Alani and Suevi, after desolating 
Gaul about three years, passed the Pyrenees into Spain, 409, 4ioA.D. 
Their ravages were dreadful, towns pillaged and burnt, the country 
laid waste, the peaceable inhabitants massacred without distinction 
of age or sex: these were but the beginning of evils, as they were 
followed by famine and pestilence; the very wild beasts, starved in 
their forests, made war on the human race, and the famine compelled 
the survivors to feed on the bodies of the dead. These statements, 
must be received with great allowance, as generalisations drawn from 
a few special facts; but, after making every deduction, they leave 
.the impression of the infliction of a more than ordinary degree of 
misery upon the population of Spain. The Visigoths settled in 
southern Gaul took possession of Catalonia, and aimed at the con- 
quest of Spain. The Alani and Suevi were in due time united to 
the Visigoths; the former in 418, the latter in 487 A.D. The Vandals 
passed over into Africa 427 A.D., and all Spain became entirely 
Visigothic. From 511-522 A.D. the two Gothic kingdoms of Spain 
and of Italy (the Ostrogoth) were united for a long period under 
Theodoric as regent for his grandchild. The Spanish Goths re- 
nounced Arianism 585 A.D. The portion of Gaul which was 
governed by the Visigoths was wisely relinquished to the Franks in 
538 A.D., and in 629 A.D. all the points occupied by the Eastern 
Empire in Spain were in possession of the Gothic kings. 

BRITAIN was abandoned by the Romans 409 A.D. For forty years 
the British petty kings held out against the Picts, but at length they 
invited the aid of a Saxon tribe from Jutland, commanded by 
Hengist and Horsa, 449 A.D., who landed at Ebbsfleet in the Isle 
of Thanet (Kent). The Picts were defeated, but the Saxon allies 
remained, and, aided by fresh and continued accessions of their 
countrymen, began the conquest of the land. The Britons made a 
stubborn resistance. In Gaul and Italy, the conquering barbarians with 
little difficulty quartered themselves on subjects who were glad to 
buy peace by obedience and tribute; but in Britain the Saxons (i.e., 
the English) had to make every inch of Britain their own by hard 
fighting. " In the forest belts, which stretched over vast spaces of 
country, they found barriers which in all cases checked their advance, 

and, in some cases, finally stopped it It is only by realising 

in this way the physical as well as the moral circumstances of Britain 
that we can understand the character of its earlier conquest. Field 

N 



178 From the Division of the Empire to the 

by field, town by town, forest by forest the land was won 

There is no need to believe that the clearing of the land meant so 
impossible a thing as the general slaughter of the men who held it. 
Slaughter there was no doubt on the battlefield, or in towns like 
Anderida, whose resistance woke wrath in their besiegers. But, for 
the most part, the Britons were not slaughtered, they were defeated 
and drew back. Such a withdrawal was only possible by the slow- 
ness of the conquest It took nearly thirty years to win Kent, 

and sixty to complete the conquest of southern Britain And 

the conquest of the bulk of the island was only wrought out after 

two centuries of bitter warfare What strikes us at once in 

the New England is this, that it was the one purely German nation 

that rose upon the wreck of Rome Roman Britain was 

almost the only province of the empire where Rome died into a 

vague tradition of the past Its law, its literature, its manners, 

its faith went with it The New England was a heathen 

country ; homestead and boundary, the very days of the week bore 
the names of the new gods of the conquerors." 1 The following 
kingdoms were established, each of which had to make good its 
hold upon the land by a vigorous contest with the Britons : Kent, 
455 A - D -> Sussex, 477 A.D., Wessex, 495 A.D., Essex, 527 A.D., 
Bernecia, 547 A.D., and Deira, 560 A.D., were united in 590 A.D. 
as the kingdom of Northumberland ; East Anglia, 575 A.D. ; Mercia, 
586 A.D. This heptarchy sometimes elected a temporary chief. 
Christianity was first introduced into Kent by St. Augustine 596 A.D. 
The Britons were left in possession of Cornwall, of Wales, and ot 
the western land of the island stretching through Cheshire and Lan- 
cashire, Westmoreland and Cumberland, &c., but this latter part of 
the territory north of Wales was in due time lost to them. 

NORTH AFRICA, including the present Tunis, Algeria, and Morocco. 
This long, narrow tract, from Tangiers to Tripoli, was extremely 
populous and rich. So great was its export of wheat that " it 
deserved the name of the common granary of Rome and mankind." 
(Gibbon). It was filled with monuments of Roman art and mag- 
nificence. Count Boniface, in a fit of anger, occasioned by the 
insults of the court of Placidia, the regent of Valentinian III., 
invited Genseric the Vandal, conqueror of Spain, to pass over into 
Africa, offering him an advantageous settlement there. Genseric, 
accompanied by fifty thousand effective men, landed in Africa, where 
he found allies in the Donatist sectarians, who regarded him as a 

1 Green's " History of the English People," vol. i. pp. 30-33. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 179 

deliverer from the tyranny of the orthodox Catholics, and also in 
the Moors and the independent tribes, 429 A.D. The Vandals, where 
they found resistance, gave no quarter ; the cities which opposed 
them were destroyed; every species of indignity and torture was 
employed to force from the captives the discovery of their hidden 
wealth. Count Boniface, when too late, repented, and saved 
Carthage and Hippo for a brief period from the power of Genseric, 
but in 539 A.D. Carthage was captured, and the Vandal conquest 
was all but complete. The moral benefit of this capture is described 
by contemporary chroniclers. " In this city, rich in all the appli- 
ances of the highest civilisation, in schools of art, of rhetoric, and 
philosophy, .... houses of ill-fame were swarming in every street, 

haunted by men of the highest rank the darker sins of Sodom 

and Gomorrah practised, avowed, gloried in Into this city 

of sin marched the Vandal army, one might say when one reads the 
history of their doings, the army of the Puritans. With all their 
cruelty, with all their greed, they kept themselves unspotted from 
the licentiousness of the splendid city. They banished the men 
who earned their living by ministering to the vilest lusts, they rooted 
out prostitution with a wise yet not a cruel hand. In short, Carthage 
under the rule of the Vandals was a city transformed, barbarous but 
moral." 1 The conquest of North Africa by the Vandals proves that 
the barbarities ascribed to them have been (as Gibbon suspected) 
much exaggerated. They appear, on the whole, to have been no 
worse than the other barbarians. 

ITALY. The Roman Empire in the west had fallen, not by an 
invasion of the Heruli, but by a mutiny of its own mercenary troops. 
The Germans had become not mere auxiliaries in the wings of the 
army, but were the backbone of the legion itself. 3 " A deputation 
from the senate of Rome proceeded to Constantinople to lay the 
insignia of royalty at the feet of the Eastern emperor, Zeno. The 
West, they declared, no longer required an emperor of its own, one 
monarch sufficed for the world. Odoaker was qualified by his 
wisdom and courage to be the protector of their state, and Zeno 
was entreated to confer upon him the title of patrician and the 

administration of the Italian provinces Odoaker, taking the 

title of king, not of Italy but of his own people, continued the con- 
sular office, respected the civil and ecclesiastical institutions of his 
subjects, and ruled for fourteen years as the nominal vicar of the 

1 Hodgkin, " History of Italy," ,-ol. i. pp. 518-520. 

2 Ibid., vol. ii. pp. 513-521. 

N 2 



i8o From the Division of the Empire to the 

Eastern Empire There was thus, legally, no extinction of the 

Western Empire, but only a reunion of East and West." 1 This is 
Bryce's favourite theory; practically, however, it appeared obvious 
to all that the Western Empire was quite extinct. Odoaker had been 
compelled, by the necessities of his position, to satisfy his barbarian 
soldiers by the grant of one-third of the lands of Italy, a measure 
which probably inflicted little misery, owing to the large extent of 
waste and uninhabited territory at that time. "All the country 
north of the Alps to the Danube and Italy itself had been reduced 
to the condition of a desert, the race of its Roman inhabitants 
nearly extinct. In Italy the existence of the people for a century 
past had been entirely artificial, principally supported by largesses 
of corn which the emperors had continued at Rome, Milan, and 
other large towns. With the loss of Africa and the ruin of Sicily by 
the Vandals these supplies ceased, and Odoaker did not attempt to 
renew them. The desolation of Italy is frequently expressed in the 
contemporary letters of the bishops and clergy. Pope Gelasius 
(496 A.D.) speaks of Emilia, Tuscany, and other provinces in which 
the human race was almost extinct ; St. Ambrose of the towns of 
Bologna, Modena, Reggio, Piacenza, which remained deserted, 
together with the adjacent country. Those who have seen the 
Campagna di Roma in our own days have witnessed the desolation 
of a country ruined by bad laws even more than by foreign aggres- 
sion. Let them imagine the gloomy scenery which now surrounds 
the capital extended over every part of Italy, and they will have 
some idea of the kingdom of Odoaker." 2 The rule of Odoaker 
continued until, by the treachery of the Byzantine court, the Ostro- 
goths in Pannonia were incited to take possession of Italy under 
their leader Theodoric, 489-493 A.D. This monarch, whose rule at 
one time extended from Illyricum to Spain, over Italy and southern 
Gaul, seemed likely to place Italy in a high position among the new 
nationalities. He brought with him an addition of about a million 
of people into a country which had been so fearfully devastated, and 
to these people one-third of the land was given. The Roman towns 
retained their municipal institutions and were governed by their own 
laws. Theodoric, deservedly called the Great, desired to found a 
dynasty ; his government was alike tolerant to the Catholics and the 
Arians ; he anticipated Charlemagne in his ability as a governor ; 
he found Italy a desert and left it a garden. Boetius, Symmachus, 
and Cassiodorus were his ministers. Unfortunately, the enemies 

; Eryce, p. 36. 2 Sismondi, "Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. pp. I7I-I73- 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 1 8 1 

of Boetius and Symmachus, by false accusations, procured their 
condemnation and death, and the last days of Theodoric were 
embittered by remorse. After his death, 526 A.D., all was disorder 
and ruin. The Emperor of the East sent Belisarius, 536 A.D., and 
in 552 A.D. Narses with armies to re-conquer Italy. In these sixteen 
years, ending in 553 A.D., great destruction of life and of cities took 
place. At one time the Goths appeared likely to preserve their 
position. The king Totila besieged Rome (then held by the troops 
of the Eastern Empire), and took it iyth December, 546 A.D., and 
razed its walls, and forced the population to leave, so that for six 
weeks Rome was without an inhabitant. The re-union of Italy to 
the Eastern Empire, which had cost so many lives and so much of 
the treasure which the Eastern Empire could ill spare, lasted only the 
brief period of fifteen years. The Lombards, having conquered the 
Gepidae by the assistance of the Avars (566 A.D.), abandoned 
Noricum and Pannonia to the Avars and moved towards the Italian 
Alps. It was not an army, but an entire nation which descended 
the Alps at Friuli in the years 568-571 under Alboin. The exarch 
at Ravenna, who governed Italy for the empire, made no resistance. 
In the towns and country under the Lombard government the 
Roman population were allowed to be governed by their own laws, 
as under the Ostrogoths. Pavia and the towns generally resisted. 
Some towns accustomed to self-government and defence as muni- 
cipalities, maintained their independence. Genoa, Pisa, Rome, 
Gaeta, Naples, Amain, Bari, were filled by crowds of fugitives. So 
also the islets on which stood Venice. Meanwhile, in Rome itself, 
the titular consulship was abolished (541 A.D.) to save the cost of 
^80,000, which custom had enforced upon each of the elect to pay 
for the games, &c., expected by the people. Soon after the senate 
ceased to exist. The cities which maintained their independence 
had their curia and municipal institutions. The Eastern Empire 
placed in its Italian possessions a duke over each curia, who became 
a mere republican magistrate, commanding a mere republican 
militia, " reviving in the breasts of the Italians virtues which had 
been extinct for centuries." 1 "It is to this era that we owe the 
origin or revival of many among the renowned cities of mediaeval 
times. Then also Venice, Ferrara, Aquileia, Chiusa, and Sienna 
then also Florence, Pisa, Genoa, Bologna, and Milan first gathered 
within their walls the means of wealth." 2 



1 Sismondi, "Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. p. 241. 

2 Shephard, p. 302. 



1 82 From tJi Division of tJie Empire to tJie 

6. (3). The nature and character of these barbaric invasions of 
the Western Empire requires to be studied in order to be understood. 
We must consider the chronic misery of the middle and lower 
classes of the old empire : the middle classes possessing small pro- 
perties, the comparatively few of the citizen class who were free, and 
the great majority living in the condition of agricultural serfs, or slaves 
held by their owners in cities, all of them ground down by a taxation 
which for generations past had been consuming the capital of each 
proprietor, diminishing every year his means of support and increas- 
ing his inability to meet the demands of the tax-gatherer. The first 
outbreak of the barbarians was, no doubt, accompanied by great loss 
of property and of life, the desolation and misery of all classes of 
the population, and the overthrow for a time of all law and order. 
But it would be some consolation to the majority of the middle and 
higher classes, that the onerous obligations of Roman citizenship 
and liability to fiscal exactions had departed for ever, while the 
labourer and the serf simply changed their masters. Robertson has 
given a laboured rhetorical declamation, ending with a very strong 
assertion : "If man were called to fix upon a period in the history 
of the world, during which the condition of the human race was 
most calamitous and afflicted, he would, without hesitation, name 
that which elapsed from the death of Theodosius the Great to the 
establishment of the Lombards in Italy," 395 A. D. to 571 A.D. 
There was no doubt much suffering, but it was not all caused by the 
barbaric invaders. The runaway slaves, the brigand Bagaudae of 
Gaul, the criminal classes liberated by the flight of the imperial 
authorities, did their fair share, and probably more, in the work of 
murder and plunder. The barbarians were comparatively few in 
number compared with the Romans and the Romanised population, 
and we find them in a very brief period of time living together in 
peace, each under their own laws, and each party* hi possession of 
warlike weapons as well as the other, which makes it more than 
probable that the change from the imperial ruler to the barbarian 
had not been accompanied by such atrocious barbarities, the 
memory of which would have stood in the way of friendly union. 
The barbarians in their warfare seldom equalled the atrocities of 
Count Tilly in the Thirty Years War, or the yet more cruel devasta- 
tions of the Palatinate by Louis XV. Smyth, in his " Lectures on 
Modern History," i. pp. 33, 34, makes some pertinent remarks, which 
deserve consideration. He supposes a thoughtful observer, cognisant 
of the ruin around him, speculating on the situation and fortunes of 
the human race. "The civilised world is sinking before these 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 183 

endless tribes of savages from the north What can be the 

consequence ? Will the world be lost in the darkness of ignorance 
and ferocity ? Or will the wrecks of literature and the arts that 
may survive the storm, be fitted to strike the attention of these rude 
conquerors, or sufficient to enrich their minds with the seeds of 
future improvement? or, lastly, on the other hand, may not this 
extended and dreadful convulsion of Europe be, after all, favourable 
to the human race ? Some change is necessary ; the civilised world 
is no longer to be respected ; its manners are corrupted, its literature 
has long declined, its religion is lost in controversy or debased by 
superstition. There is no genius, no liberty, no virtue ; surely the 
human race will be improved by the renewal which it will receive 
from the influence of these free-born warriors .... and, regenerated 
by this new infusion of youth and vigour, will no longer exhibit the 
vices and the weakness of this decrepitude of humanity." Now, if the 
subsequent history of the world could have been revealed to him, 
could he have realised the diffused humanity and knowledge, the 
political freedom, the social advancement and happiness of man- 
kind, the general triumph of law, reason, and benevolence in our 
modern civilisation (in spite of its manifold deficiencies) ? would he 
not have rejoiced in that gracious providential government of the 
Great Ruler of nations, through which the evils and sufferings of 
the barbarian settlement in Europe had been overruled for the 
benefit of the highest interests of the human race ? One benefit 
has been acknowledged by Hume : "If our part of the world main- 
tains sentiments of liberty, honour, equity, and valour superior to 
the rest of mankind, it owes these advantages to the seeds implanted 
by those generous barbarians"; the moral gain has been great. 
Milman remarks: " In one important respect, the Teutonic tempera- 
ment coincided in raising the moral tone. In all that relates to 
sexual intercourse, the Roman society was corrupt to its core, and the 
contagion had spread to the provinces .... Whether as a reminis- 
cence of some older civilisation or as a peculiarity in their national 
character, the Teutons had always paid the highest respect to their 
females, a feeling which cannot exist without high notions of personal 
purity, which it generates, and which in its turn tends to generate. 1 
In one respect especially the barbarian revolutions favoured sim- 
plicity of manners and personal industry ; they threw the population 
upon the land. The conquerors at once took a certain portion of 
the soil for themselves : the Heruli, Ostrogoths, and Lombards one- 

1 Milman, vol. i. pp. 282-284. 



1 84 From the Division of the Empire to the 

third; the Burgundians and Visigoths two-thirds; the Anglo-Saxons, the 
old English, took all, and drove the Britons before them into Wales ; 
the provincials, from their ability to be useful, were generally well 
treated by the barbarian rulers, and, in a country where the land 
was far more extensive than the needs of the population, the loss of 
a portion of an estate would not involve absolute ruin to its pro- 
prietor. The king or chief took the public lands for himself, and as 
suzerain apportioned it as fiefs to be held subject to military service. 
So also the subordinate chiefs. By this means the land was occupied 
by a free population, and the possession of land became an object 
of solicitude. Under the Greeks and Romans the cities were every- 
thing ; the small landholders and working farmers, nothing. Now, 
the chieftains of all ranks and the great chief, the suzerain, the 
sovereign, the king, the emperor, were compelled to live chiefly in 
their own domains, from whence they drew their means of support. 
Meanwhile the Roman provincials, improved by the admixture of 
the barbarian races, became accustomed to defend themselves and 
their country. The new condition of affairs produced in time a new 
people. Every new conquest brought to the conquered country a 
number of vigorous soldiers ready to take up the plough or the 
spade. Unfortunately the temptations to the large landholders of 
dispensing with the free agricultural tenants and replacing them by 
slaves returned more or less in intervals of security from invasion. 
Thus the free men, if not rich enough to hold slaves, began to look 
upon labour as degrading, and sold their small holdings, resuming 
their position in the armed band of some powerful chief. For- 
tunately the large proprietors were compelled to live on their pro- 
perties as there only could they be supported by the produce ; and 
they were soon taught by the ravages of barbarian tribes, Teutons, 
Slavs, or Northern, the necessity of having free men settled on their 
estates, on terms of military tenure. In due time the feudal 
system, which was at first the great consolidator and defence of the 
population, was fully established in Europe. 

7. (4). The Eastern Empire up to the Saracen invasion. This 
empire is also called by historians the Lower Empire, the Greek 
Empire, the Byzantine Empire, by which names its identity with the 
old Roman Empire is kept in the background. Until our day 
there seems to have been a most unphilosophical contempt exhi- 
bited by historians for the annals of an empire which connects 
modern history with antiquity. Gibbon speaks of them as " one 
uniform tale of weakness and misery," related by "servile historians." 
Even Lecky has fallen into the same error. Voltaire, from pure 
ignorance, regards them as " a worthless repertory of declamation 



Revival of tJie Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 185 

and miracles disgraceful to the human mind." Within the last half- 
century the writings of both Finlay and of Freeman have en- 
lightened our ignorance, and it is not likely that henceforth the 
sneers of literary prejudice will be adopted by our historians on the 
authority of Gibbon. It is only fair to quote largely the eloquent 
and powerfully convincing remarks of Freeman, in which irony and 
sarcasm are made the vehicles conveying truths which cannot be 
gainsaid. " The popular belief is .... that from the fifth to the 
fifteenth century an empire of some kind maintained itself in Con- 
stantinople, though during the whole of that time it remained in a 
dying state. It was ruled, by common consent, that a power, which 
bore up for a thousand years against greater difficulties and fiercer 
assaults than any other power ever had to strive against, must 
necessarily have been weak and contemptible in the favourite 
slang, ' effete ' from the beginning." In reference to the past 
history of the empire, " the result has often been only to throw 
fresh scorn upon some of the most wonderful pages in the history 
of the world." . ..." It was ruled that the men who preserved 
the fabric of Roman administration through so many ages, the men 
who beat back the attacks of the most dangerous enemies through 
so many ages, who after each period of decay brought back a fresh 
period of renewed power and glory, must all of them have been 
fools and cowards, given up only to luxury and sloth." .... This 
shows " how little they knew of that mighty empire which for so 
many ages cherished the flame of civilisation and literature when it 
was well-nigh extinct in Western Europe ; which preserved the 
language of Thucydides and Aristotle, and the political power of 
Augustus and Constantine, till the nations of the West were once 
more prepared to receive the gift and despise the giver." The 
general historian was content to pass by the uninteresting revolutions 
" of that worthless and decrepit power which survived every surround- 
ing state, whose legions in one century restored the imperial sway 
from the Euphrates to the ocean, and in the next planted the 
Roman eagles upon the palaces of the Great King the power which 
endured the first onslaught of the victorious Saracen, which defended 
its frontiers for three glorious centuries, which won back province 
after province, and made the successor of the Prophet tremble before 
the arms of the triumphant Caesar." * " Because the empire of the 
Paleologi was an utterly worn-out state, people forget the interval of 
six centuries, and leap to the conclusion that the mighty monarch of 
the Iconoclast and Macedonian Dynasties from 717-1056 A.D., was 

1 Freeman, "Essays," third series, pp. 232-234. 



1 86 From the Division of the Empire to the 

the same Never did any power hold up so long as this 

despised Lower Empire against such ceaseless and restless attacks. 
Never had any power so vast a frontier to guard and such countless 
and restless foes to guard it against .... but men were never 
lacking to defend her .... to drive back her foes, and to win back 
her lost provinces." It was " a conservative power, producing a never- 
failing succession of able men .... but few great men, and not 
above one or two of the heroic type, for there was no scope for 
founders or creators .... The government went on without any 

definite rule of succession Every soldier in the army, every 

official might, either by his crimes or his merits, take his place on 
the Byzantine throne." 1 This, however, was a source of weakness. 
Its strength was the common Christianity of the Greek Church, and 
the attachment of the Greek people to the political and religious 
ruling power of their race, the status of the emperor. 

8. Arcadius, who succeeded Theodosius in the East, was all his 
life under the tutelage of favourites or women ; but the Isaurian 
rebels were subdued and the Bulgarians repulsed. The family 
of Theodosius the Great ended with Pulcheria, the daughter of 
Theodosius the Younger, who married, 450 A.D., Marcian, who died 
457 A.D. Leo the Thracian was then raised to the throne, through 
the influence of the patrician Asper j he has been called the Great, 
and is the first sovereign who was crowned by the clergy, a precedent 
from which the inference was drawn that this rite was necessary as 
an expression of the will of deity. Justin, a Thracian peasant, 
began a new dynasty, and reigned from 518-527 A.D., and after him 
his nephew, Justinian the Great, more remarkable for his legislative 
Pandects, for the erection of the Chyrch of St. Sophia in Constanti- 
nople, and for the victories of his generals by which Italy was 
re-united to the empire and north Africa also. Italy soon reverted 
to the Lombards, but north Africa remained until conquered by the 
Saracens in the seventh century. Belisarius is called by Freeman 
"the greatest of generals," yet he admits that "all Justinian's 
conquests were, beyond all doubt, an anachronism in themselves, 
and a deadly blow to the empire .... when he sent his armies 
forth to subdue Italy, and allowed every wandering tribe from the 
north to insult him with impunity in his capital," 254-7 A.D. " Each 
of the thirty-eight years of his reign was marked by an invasion of 
the barbarians, and it has been said .... that each invasion cost 
200,000 subjects to the empire .... earthquakes overturned many 

1 Freeman, "Essays," third series, pp. 235-264. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 187 

cities, one of which, May 26, 516, overthrew Antioch with 250,000 
persons. The plague, received from Pelusium, raged from 542 to 
594 A.D. with more or less destructiveness." a Sclavonic tribes 
occupied the north-west provinces, and Greece received a large body 
of Sclavonic invaders, who held Peloponnesus for two hundred and 
fifty years. Heraclius, the governor of north Africa, relieved Con- 
stantinople from the tyrant Phocas, 610 A.D. Such was the weakness 
of the government that the Avars and the Sclavs from the north and 
the Persians from the east encamped near the Bosphorus for ten 
years. By a great effort Heraclius carried the war into Persia itself ; 
his campaigns are worthy of a place beside those of Hannibal." ~ 
Suddenly, however, a new power, the most formidable of all the 
enemies of the Eastern Empire, made its appearance. Arabia, united 
under the successors of Mahomet, began the Saracenic conquests in 
Asia and Africa. 

9. (5) The rise and progress of the Mohametan Saracens (from 
Arabia). From time immemorial, the bulk of the Arabian popula- 
tions have been nomads, as the Bedouins of our day warlike and 
restless, their hand against every man, and every man's hand against 
them. In some fertile oasis, especially in the south, we read of 
kingdoms, as Yemen, &c., and a few towns, as Mecca, Medina, &c. 
The care of cattle, &c., was their chief employment, with the 
exception of predatory excursions into the territory of their neigh- 
bours and tribal wars among themselves. They had never been 
united as one people, under one government, until they came under 
the influence of their great reformer, Mahomet, who claimed to be a 
prophet from God, sent to supply the deficiencies of the Jewish and 
Christian revelations, and to compel by force submission to the 
simple creed of the new dispensation " There is one God, and 
Mahomet is His prophet." It is impossible to doubt the sincerity 
and honesty of the new reformer in the beginning of his mission, 
and it is painful to notice the gradual deepening of his zeal into a 
wild, narrow fanaticism, and the gradual deterioration of his once 
pure, self-denying life by a course of sensuality and cruelty. He 
was probably self-deceived, and fancied, during his epileptic attacks, 
those visions of the eternal world and of his personal intercourse 
with heaven which we find implied in the Koran. His success was 
easy and natural after once he had obtained the help of a warlike 
tribe. After his flight from Mecca, 622 A.D. (the date of the era the 

1 Sismondi, "Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. pp. 214-216. 

2 Freeman, " Essays," third series, p. 237. 



1 88 From the Division of the Empire to the 

Hegira), the converts had simply to relinquish idolatry. Polygamy 
was regulated, not proscribed, and the duty of a continuous war in 
order to propagate the new faith, with the prospect of a present 
reward in the shape of dominions, wealth, and luxury, was eagerly 
embraced. In fact, so unsettled and so disunited in feeling were 
the Arab tribes in the time of the prophet, and after his death, that 
foreign war was absolutely necessary to prevent internal wars. Their 
union was maintained under the victorious khalifs, the successors of 
Mahomet. The Eastern world was invitingly open. Persia was at 
its lowest ebb after the victories of Heraclius, and the provinces of 
the Eastern Empire outside of Asia Minor, with Egypt, were, and 
had been for generations, in a state of chronic discontent with the 
dominations of the Greek Church, to which a large proportion of 
the population, though Christians, but of sects such as Nestorians, 
Monophysites, Jacobites, Copts, &c., were opposed. The rapid 
extent of the Mahometan conquests is thus easily explained, when, in 
addition to the distracted state of the Byzantine and Persian empires, 
we take into consideration the policy of the early khalifs to enlist the 
avarice of the Arab tribes, as well as their fanaticism, on the side of 
war and conquest. The armies were held together by a species of 
political communism ; the surplus revenues were divided among all 
the Moslem community. In Omar's time a census was taken of the 
Arab tribes and families, and a fixed yearly sum paid to each tribe. 
A number of the lowest class received a thousand dirrhems, about 
forty pounds sterling. The great object was to maintain and increase 
the pure Arab race, and to bind it, by the enjoyment of the plunder 
of the conquered nations, to the faith and obedience of the ruling 
power. The cry of plunder and conquest reverberated through the 
land. Whole tribes, with their wives and children, issued forth to 
battle, and even as the tale of cities captured, of booty rich beyond 
compute, of fair captives distributed on the. field, and, above all, at 
the sight of the royal fifth of the spoil, and of the slaves sent to 
Medina, fresh tribes took their arms and went." 1 In the early 
battles, the spoil to each horseman was equal to ^40, besides arms, 
&c., and sometimes to ^60. Of the spoils of battle, four parts 
were at once divided among the warriors and one-fifth reserved for 
the Treasury ; pensions were paid to the widows and children of the 
soldiery in fact, the whole Arab nation was subsidised. Large 
numbers left Arabia and settled in the conquered territory, estimated 
at 500,000 before the death of Omar. 2 Under Abu-Bekr, Omar, 

1 See Van Kreuser's History, &c., "Under the Kaliphs," Edinburgh Review, 
No. civ. p. 38. a M ,, ir > s Anna|s of the ear]y Khalifs . 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 1 89 

Othman, Ali, and their successors, all Asia, from the Mediterranean 
to the Indus, with Egypt, 636-640 A.D. < North Africa was not 
subdued until after a resistance of sixty years, 704 A.D. The Gothic 
kingdom of Spain was partly conquered 711 A.D. Dissensions as to 
the true succession in the Khalifat to some extent impeded the 
action of the warlike generals. The Shiites regard Ali as the true 
successor of Mahomet, and execrate the three who preceded him as 
usurpers. On the death of Ali, 660 A.D., his son Hassan was set 
aside in favour of Moawiya, who began the dynasty of the 
Ommiyades, who ruled until 750 A.D., when supplanted by Saffah,. 
the founder of the Abbasside dynasty. The seat of the khalif was 
first at Mecca, then at Damascus, then at Kufa, but was removed by 
Al-Mansor to his new city of Bagdad, 762 A.D. Haron Al-Rashid, 
famous for his magnificence and love of the arts and of literature, 
began his reign in 786 A.D., and was the contemporary of Charlemagne. 
In our day full justice has been done to the favourable side of the 
character of Mahomet and of his system. Some of the Mahometans, 
who, by the liberality of a Christian government in India, have been 
enabled to acquire a knowledge of modern history (outside the 
Mahometan world), have made their pretensions ridiculous by such 
tirades as the following: "Three great evils have befallen the 
human race, three great disasters which have materially retarded the 
progress of the world, and put back the hour-hand of time for 
centuries. The first is the failure of the Persians in Greece ; the 
second is the unsuccessful siege of Constantinople in the eighth 
century by the Saracens ; and the third is the unfortunate result of 
the Battle of Tours between the Moslems and Charles Martel." 1 
Syed Ameer Ali had a predecessor in his literary speculations. 
Anacharsis Cloots, " the representative of the human race," whose 
vagaries furnished amusement and disgust during the French Revolu- 
tion of 1789 A.D., c., wrote a work entitled "Certitude des Preuves 
du Mahometan," 1 780 A.D. Historians charitably suppose that he was 
mad ; the excuse for Syed Ameer Ali is simply ignorance sheer, 
"incorrigible ignorance." The remarks of R. Bosworth Smith, though 
far too exaggerated, and unsupported by some of the facts of the 
history of Mahomet, are a little nearer the truth. They exhibit, too, 
the striking difference between the incapability of the Eastern mind 
to generalise from any one fact of Western history, compared with 
the calm judgment of the educated mind of a Western scholar 
friendly to his hero. " The religion that he taught is indeed below 

1 Syed Ameer Ali, " Life of Mahomet," I2mo., 1873, p. 341. 



190 From the Division of the Empire to the 

the purest form of our own .... there is the protest against 
polytheism in all its shapes ; there is the absolute equality of man 
before God ; there is the sense of the dignity of human nature ; 
there is the simplicity of life, the vivid belief in God's providence, 
the entire submission to His will ; and last, not least, there is the 
courage of their convictions, the fearless avowal before men of their 
belief in God, and their pride in its possession as the one thing 

needful If Christians generally were as ready to confess 

Christ, and to be proud of being His servant, as Mahometans are 
of being followers of Mahomet, one chief obstacle to the spread of 
Christianity would be removed." 1 Sismondi remarks that "alms- 
giving is a most important duty enforced by Mahomet, but the rule 
has been substituted for the sentiment. The man who has scrupu- 
lously performed the duty of almsgiving is not the less hard and 
cruel to his fellow men." 2 Muir's " Life of Mahomet " is the fullest 
and fairest account of the prophet and his times. 3 Bishop Thirl wall 
thinks better of the prophet than of his system, observing that 
" Mahomet was not a Mahometan, any more than Wilkes was a 
Wilkite." 4 The revival of the military spirit among the Christian 
nations was one result of the aggressive character of Mahometanism. 
10. (6). The rise of the Empire of the German Franks under 
Karl der Grosse (Charlemagne). The family of Pepin (the mayor of 
the palace under the Merovingian Austrasian kings, happily for 
Europe, governed France with a vigorous hand. Already the 
Saracens, having conquered North Africa, had also conquered the 
Gothic kingdom of Spain, with the exception of the petty region of 
Asturias, still held by Don Pelayo and his successors, 710-11 A.D., 
they then claimed Septimania as part of the Spanish monarchy, but 
were defeated at Thoulouse in a great battle by Eudes, Count of 
Acquitaine, 718-721 A.D. In 731, under Abder-rabman, they had 
advanced as far as Sens with three hundred and seventy-five thou- 
sand men, intending to settle in France, had defeatecf Elides, 
destroying his army, and were marching towards Poitiers. Charles 
Martel, the son of Pepin, encountered them at the junction of the 
Clain and Vienne ; after six days the battle commenced. The 
Saracens were defeated ; three hundred thousand said to be slain ; 
the survivors fled. Charles Martel (the hammerer) had truly ham- 
mered the infidels. Several campaigns followed, in which they were 

' " Mahomet and Mahometans," pp. 231, 232. 

2 Sismondi, "Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. p. 292. 

3 Muir, 4th edition, 8vo. 

4 Bishop Thirlwall, " Letters to a Friend," p. 106. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 191 

gradually driven southward, but Septimania was not finally wrested 
from them till 759 A.D. by Pepin the Short. Had not Charles Martel 
won this battle, it appears impossible for France to have avoided 
subjugation. With her (Sismondi thinks) that Europe probably 
would have been conquered, for there were no people in the rear of 
the Franks in a condition for war. No other Christian people ; none 
other that had made any progress toward civilisation ; none, in short, 
which either by its valour, its policy, its means of defence, or the 
number of its troops, could indulge any hope of victory if the 
French were conquered. 1 This notion, though supported by Gibbon 
as well as Sismondi, seems to be questionable. The temporary 
success of the Saracen hordes might have delayed the consolidation 
of Gaul, but the Frank and the German armies and leaders were 
fully equal to the duty of defending their nationality and their 
Christianity. It is, however, very singular that, twice in Gaul, the 
battle in defence of European civilisation has been fought (first by 
yEtius and his barbarian allies near Chalons, 451 A.D., against Attila ; 
and again by Charles Martel, at Poitiers, 732 A.D.). The title, as well 
as the power of the king, were conferred upon Pepin, the son of 
Charles Martel, 752 A.D. This was not merely a transfer of the 
royalty from the Merovingian to the Carlovingian dynasty. It was a 
real revolution, a national one, on the part of the Frankish trans- 
Rhenan aristocracy and population a final carrying out out of the 
German influence, and practically a re-conquest of Gaul (according 
to Sismondi) and an effectual check to the influence of Romanising 
effeminency. By this event the power of the clergy was largely 
increased, as they and the Pope had a large share in the change of 
dynasty. No one then, nor any historian since, has expressed any 
regret for the Merovingian race of kings. The most wretched speci- 
men of barbarians without any redeeming feature, exhibiting all the 
vices of gross sensuality accompanied by cruelty, and followed by 
degrading superstition. From Clovis we see in them the utmost 
degradation to which the human race can be brought. The last of 
the race, the " rois faineants," were so brutalised by vice as to be 
without memory or forethought, or will of their own. 

Pepin made two expeditions into Italy at the request of Pope 
Stephen, who came over the Alps to invite him, 753 A.D., and defeated 
Astolphe, the King of the Lombards, who had just taken the 
exarchate (Ravenna) from the Eastern Empire. This exarchate 
Pepin gave to the Pope ; this was the beginning of the Pope's 

1 Sismondi, " Fall of the Roman Empire," vol.ii. p. 48. " Ibid., vol. i. p. 132. 



1 92 From the Division of the Empire to the 

temporal power, 754-756 A.D. The opposition of the Popes to the 
Lombards was not merely to Lombards, but to any rule in Italy 
which overshadowed their own influences. From the time of the 
Carlovingians to that of Victor Emmanuel, a period of more than 
eleven hundred years, the pontiffs were ever consistently opposed to 
any powerful Italian kingdom. At present Italy is united and the 
Pope simply the head of the Church, but this always has been 
effected in spite of the opposition of the Pope and clergy. Charle- 
magne (Karl der Grosse) succeeded Pepin 768 A.D. His dominions 
extended from the Pyrenees to the lower Rhine, including Holland, 
and from the Channel to the Enns (beyond Saltzburg in Austria). 
The Alemanni, Bavarians, and Thuringians, in Germany were, and 
had been, subject to the Franks. Beyond these were Saxons and 
other German tribes, sundry Sclavonic tribes, and the brutal Avars 
(Hungary). Charlemagne's great work was the securing the peace of 
his German dominions, by the thirty years' war with the barbarous 
and warlike Saxons, and by the humbling of the yet more barbarous 
Avars on the south and east. He had also to check the Arabs of 
Spain, and established a new province, " the Spanish March," 
for the security of his south-western frontier. During the forty- 
three years of his reign the aspect of affairs changed, not only 
through Germany, but through all Europe. With him the ancient 
history of Germany ends ; except for his interference, the uncivilised 
Sclavonians would have checked the growth of the civilisa- 
tion of the West, and these barbarians must have yielded to 
the Huns (Avars), who would probably have renewed the savage 
times of Attila. How great was the danger to the small civilised 
portion of Europe from the warlike and savage hordes to the East, 
may be inferred from the long and severe contests which Charle- 
magne's successors had to carry on with the Hungarian and 
Sclavonic tribes, although their power had been most broken by his 
victories over them. The beginning of the civilisation of Germany 
and of Central Europe was the work of this great man. His first 
expedition beyond the Alps in 772 A.D. was followed by the conquest 
of the Lombard kingdom. These Lombards, a Teutonic people, 
much abused by the historians of the Papacy, were the most likely 
of any of the barbarians since Theodoric to have established a 
settled government in Italy. But the war, with the barbarian tribes 
on the Eastern frontier were the main occupation of Charlemagne. 
Though aggressive, they were in fact defensive. " He felt that, if he 
did not succeed in destroying the barbarians, they would destroy 
him. He did not propose to them the terrible choice, ' submit or 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 193 

die,' until they had stubbornly and fiercely rejected the milder term, 
* Be quiet and live.' " In 772 A.D. the war with the Saxons had 
already commenced which lasted thirty-two years. These Saxons 
lived after the fashion of their ancestors, without any supreme 
chief, except in war. They were a community of free men in free 
dwellings, on the whole rather troublesome by their predatory 
excursions than dangerous ; their impunity amid their forests and 
morasses, in which they had erected powerful defences, rendered it 
difficult to obtain redress by these who had suffered from their 
lawlessness, so that their subjugation was essential to the consolida- 
tion of Germany and the safety of Western Europe. There was no 
mercy on either side in these wars. On one occasion four thousand 
five hundred warriors were beheaded by Charlemagne, and ten 
thousand distributed as slaves in Gaul and Italy. From more than 
one canton as many as one-third of the inhabitants were driven 
southward and westward and settled amid a population hostile to 
them. " The final success of Charlemagne's long war against the 
Saxons afforded the first example since Julius Caesar of the 
superiority of the military discipline, which cannot exist without 
some civilisation, over the ruder valour of savage tribes. He 
carried his victorious arms into the countries which had for centuries 
poured their destroying bands over the prostrate south, and from 
that moment the progress of improvement in Europe, though occa- 
sionally disturbed, was never interrupted by the irruptions of northern 
invaders." * In 786 A.D. the Lombard duchy of Benevento sub- 
mitted to Charlemagne. The wars with the AVARS began soon after, 
and lasted until 803 A.D. The power of this people was, from 
their position, dangerous to the peace of the west and south. Being 
a nomad race, they built no cities, but intrenched themselves in 
camps or rings in the marshes of Hungary. Their leading ring, 
near Buda-Pest, was a huge village or wood covering a large district, 
encircled by hedges of trees with their branches interlaced, in circum- 
ference about thirty-six or forty-five miles. The Avars were a tall, 
handsome race, excellent archers, all clothed, with their horses, 
in complete chain armour. Though ingenious in metal-work, 
&c., they were faithless, avaricious, and remarkably cruel. From 
their position at Buda they were able at any time to plunder and 
ravage, eastward to Constantinople or westward to the Rhine. By 
the persevering vigour of Charlemagne they were driven further east, 
and in 796 A.D. the head ring at Buda-Pest, the capital residence of 

1 Edinbiirgh Review, vol. xxxv. p. 502. 
O 



194 From the Division of the Empire to the 

the Chagan, which they had deemed impregnable, was taken, and 
the whole nation driven beyond the Raab, which Charlemagne made 
the eastern boundary of his empire. After repeated rebellions, 
requiring fresh expeditions, they ceased to disturb the empire, 
803 A.D. These successes secured the admiration of the Khalif 
Haroun-al-Raschid, who began a friendly exchange of presents, 
798 A.D. 

In order to secure his eastern boundary, Charlemagne established 
a line of posts ; marquisates, under marquises or margraves, from the 
Adriatic to the Elbe, were formed, each margrave dwelling in a 
strongly fortified burg peopled by German settlers. An attempt 
was made to unite the Maine and the Danube by a canal, but failed 
from defective skill in the engineers. It was well that the unsettled 
state of Germany prevented Charlemagne from pursuing his conquests 
over the Avari to the gates of Constantinople. In 799 A.D. Leo III., 
the Pope, came to Paderborn to solicit help from Charlemagne 
against the rebellious citizens of Rome. This help was given in 
800 A.D., and on Christmas Day Charlemagne was crowned by the 
Pope " Emperor of the Romans." This Roman title thus assumed 
by a Germanic-Frankish king is a proof of the deep feeling of 
attachment to the legality of the old imperial government by even 
the partially Romanised barbarian tribes, whose chiefs desired to 
govern by imperial titles. The general feeling is expressed by 
Lactantius, " When Rome, the head of the world, shall have fallen, 
who can doubt that the end is come of human things, ay, of the 
earth itself? " How the King of the Franks obtained the supplies of 
men to fill and keep up the ranks of his armies is a difficult point 
to determine, considering the then state of Frankish Gaul. In 
the centre, the Frank and the Roman Gallic population was but 
thinly scattered ; the nobles occupied whole provinces which they 
used as grazing farms ; the freemen, in their small hereditary pro- 
perties bordering on these vast estates, felt themselves in an 
inferior position, and were tempted to renounce their allodial farms 
and submit voluntarily to their powerful neighbour, receiving in 
return protection. In southern Gaul the population was numerous 
but unwarlike, being mainly Roman Gallic. They were regarded 
with distrust, and were not largely employed in the armies or in 
offices of trust. But in the provinces on the Rhine the Teutonic 
population had preserved their language, had retained their allodial 
possessions, and possessed but few slaves. There were among them 
a few great lords and their dependent feudes or feudatory vassals. 
War, however, was to these Teutons a great burden ; it took away the 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 195 

freeman and the vassal. Pepin and Charles Martel had to grapple 
with this difficulty ; they introduced fresh supplies of free settlers, 
but the drain upon the population was far too great. Already five 
thousand proprietors constituted a gentry, which, by the absorption 
of the small properties, monopolised the land of Frankish (Roman) 
Gaul. The supplies which kept up the armies of Charlemagne 
must have been drawn largely from wandering barbarians seeking 
employment as soldiers as the only occupation suited to them, and 
from the conquered barbarians themselves, who, from their love of 
war, were generally as ready to fight for their conquerors as they had 
been to fight against them. 

ii. (7) The Eastern Empire from the time of the Saracenic in- 
vasion to Charlemagne. The loss of territory through the Saracens 
has been already stated. Nothing but the impregnable position of 
Constantinople, defended by the Greek fire, inextinguishable except 
by vinegar and salt, and the loyalty of the Greek population in Asia 
Minor, saved the empire and gave it the opportunity of recovering 
its losses, as far as recovery was desirable. Constantinople was 
besieged three times 669, 717, 719 A.D. Italy, Syria, Egypt, North 
Africa were well lost, and the loss was gain. " The work of the 
seventh and eighth centuries was to lop away .... the outlying 
provinces (Italy, Syria, &c.), and to make the empire far more 
nearly coexistent than before with the lands where the Greek 
tongue and Greek civilisation had really established themselves.'' 1 
.... " these losses were distinct gains to the empire as 
a power. They changed the unwieldy empire of Justinian into the 
empire of Leo the Isaurian, still vast, still scattered .... but com 
paratively compact, incomparably stronger, and gradually becoming 
identified with the leading nations within its borders." The settlement 
of the Slavi in Servia and Croatia, 640 A.D., and the kingdom of the 
Bulgarians, founded south of the Danube, 680 A.D., did not affect 
the strength of the empire : they occupied 'territories already wasted, 
except when Greece was ravaged and possessed by Slavic tribes. 
Leo III., the Isaurian (the Iconoclast), 718-741 A.D., defended the 
empire, and Constantinople especially, against the attack of the 
Saracens, with 120,000 men and 1,800 ships. The ships were burnt 
and the walls defended by the use of the Greek fire. Freeman 
regards him as "the highest type of the conservative politician." 3 
In his age the empire was not yet Greek, but becoming so. From 
that time it became a Byzantine empire, with its Roman polity and 

Freeman's "Essays," third series, p. 254. 2 Ibid., p. 236. 

O 2 



ig6 From the Division of the Empire to the 

its Greek intellect. Under the regency of Irene (Constantine VI. ) y 
Haroun-al-Raschid, the Arabian khalif, penetrated as far as Nico- 
media, but, despairing of taking Constantinople, he received tribute 
and retired. Constantine VI. was set aside by his mother, who 
was the reigning ruler of Constantinople contemporary with Charle- 
magne. 

12. (8) Scandinavia and the Eastern Plains north and west 
of the Black Sea and the Danube. (a) SCANDINAVIA was regarded 
by the ancient geographers as a large island separated from 
the continent of Europe by the Baltic Sea. The earliest in- 
habitants are supposed to have been Kelts (in Jutland at least, 
whence the Cimbri, known to the Romans, but by some these 
are regarded as Teutons). Gothic races at an early period 
settled in Jutland, the Islands, and in Norway and Sweden. 
They did not find the Finns and Lapps already settled, as was 
once supposed. It is now discovered that these Finns and Lapps 
reached the north of Europe by the high north route from 
Siberia, and that they and the Teuton Goths first came in contact 
near the Arctic circle. The Gothic migration from the fabulous 
Ars-Gard in Asia to Sweden was headed by Odin at some period 
very remote, though some think so low as between 300 B.C. and 
50 B.C., in which probably a series of migrations took place from the 
south-east. All the old royal races of Norway, Sweden^ and Den- 
mark claim descent from Odin. The coast of Norway, abounding 
in deep secure inlets (fiords), was especially suited to a sea-going 
people, and the land, rugged and hemmed in by lofty mountains, 
was only to a small extent fit for agriculture. Sweden was covered 
with dense forests and morasses ; and the provinces of Scania and 
Gothland, on the whole fertile, were apparently first cleared by 
settlers from Denmark, and naturally attached to the Danish king- 
dom. It was composed of Swethiod (on both sides of Lake Malar) 
and of Gauthiod (on both sides of Lake Wettern). There are two 
lines of kings, those of the Swedes and those of the Goths, which 
occasions great confusion in its early history. The territory of 
Sweden gradually increased, but it did not occupy the east of the 
Gulf of Bothnia till the twelfth century. The Yngling Dynasty 
reigned in Sweden ; the Skiolding in Denmark ; the Sczmage in 
Norway, at Drontheim : that is to say, some one chief of the royal 
race was regarded as superior nominally. In or about 630 A.D., 
Ivar Vidfadme, king of Denmark, reigning at Lethra, conquered the 
Yngling Dynasty, at Upsala, and it is said that his family reigned 
over both countries until about 803 A.D. The Battle of Brarella, 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 197 

between Sigurd and Harald Hildetand, 794 A.D., closes the mythic 
age of Scandinavian history, 613 A.D. (Olaf Traetelia, driven from 
Upsala, passed on to the west of the Lake Weneren, cleared the forests, 
and founded a kingdom which embraced part of Norway, but was after- 
wards absorbed by Norway and Sweden.) At that time Sweden 
beyond Upsala was all forest and morass. The Scandinavian his- 
torians speak of regular government under the Odin dynasties, and 
glow over the Temple priestly court, first at Sigtuna, then at 
Upsala, in Sweden. Of this regular government we see no trace : 
petty kings innumerable, powerful enough to rob and fight, but 
unable to command obedience and enforce law. Denmark, " the 
darkly wooded land," was the most civilised, through its vicinity to Ger- 
many ; generally, elsewhere, a legalised anarchy. The safety-valve for 
the pent-up warlike energies of such a people was to be found in the 
piratical expeditions of the Vikings or Northmen, which were a terror 
and misery to civilised Europe for more than two hundred years. 
Norway alone could send out of its fiords 336 ships, each carrying 60 
to 70 armed men. ($) The Venedi and other Sclavonic tribes dwelling 
east of the Oder occupied North Germany and Poland; (c) the Avars, 
who had partly taken the place of the Huns, had been curtailed of their 
territory west of the Danube by Charlemagne ; (d) a kindred tribe, 
the Magyars, were dwelling from Transylvania to the Euxine ; (e) to 
the south of these, on both sides of the Danube, was the Bulgarian 
kingdom, founded 634 A.D.; (/) Sclavish tribes occupied Servia and 
all the coasts and mountains of Illyria down to the Morea, practi- 
cally independent of the Eastern Empire. The breaking up of Attila's 
Hunnish empire, and the departure of the Ostrogoths, Gepidae, and 
Lombards had left the Avars as the leading tribe, until humbled by 
Charlemagne ; (g) far to the north of the Euxine were the Khazars 
(a Calmuck tribe) and the Patzinacites; (/i) the Russians (a Sclavonic 
tribe driven to the north by the Khazars) had founded Novogorod on 
the Ilmen, and Kieef on the Dnieper. The wars of Charlemagne, 
by breaking the charm of Avarian superiority, had prepared the way 
for the nationality of Bohemia, Moravia, Poland, Lithuania, the 
Croats, the Serbs, &c. We read of one Samo, a Frankish warlike 
merchant, who, nearly two centuries before Charlemagne, opposed 
the Avars, and controlled the trade path between Constantinople and 
the West, and who was regarded as king by the Bohemians and 
Carinthians, 630 A.D. All these details are as near the truth as can 
be gathered from the obscure and conflicting accounts of the anna- 
lists of this age ; ( /) there was also a kingdom of Biarmeland to the 
north of the Russians, extending from Lake Onega to the Ural 



198 From the Division of the Empire to the 

Mountains, and from Perm to Archangel. The people were a 
Finnish race, to some extent civilised, as they lived in towns, and 
cultivated the ground. Traders came in the summer, not only for 
peltry, but also for the productions of India and China, received 
through the Khazars by the Caspian Sea. This territory was 
united to Russia in the twelfth century. (/) Beyond these, on the 
east side of the Uralian range, were the Igours, or Issedones, who 
from a remote period had been acquainted with letters and astro- 
nomy. They had been conquered by the Huns, and part of them 
settled in Biarmeland, at Perm ; the rest were conquered by the 
Keraites, a dominant race in Central Asia (125 A.D.), ruling at 
Karakorum. 

India. Three Dynasties in North- West India are distinguished 
by their opposition to Scythian invasions the Sahs, of Surashtra, 
from 60 to 70 B.C. to 235 A.D. ; the Guptos, of Kanauj, from 
319 A.D. to 450 A.D. the Valabhi (in Cutch and Malwa), from 480 
to 722 A.D. All these were engaged in wars with the barbarian 
tribes from the north-west. The state religion generally in India was 
Buddhism ; but by the year 800 A.D. the Brahmins obtained the 
ascendancy, and the Buddhists were expelled. 

China.) after centuries of civil war and rival kingdoms, was par- 
tially united by the Suy Dynasty, 590 A.D., under Yang Keen, who 
established a library of 15,000 volumes. The Tang Dynasty began 
618 A.D., under Tai-tsung, who over-ran Tartary, and extended his 
power to Khoten, and Kashgar, to East Persia and the Caspian 
Sea. A Nestorian priest introduced Christianity 635 A.D. After 
this, alternate able and weak emperors destroyed the imperial 
prestige, and prepared the way for a new dynasty. 

13. (9) THE ECCLESIASTIAL HISTORY of this period. Amid the 
calamities which accompanied the fall of the Empire in the West 
Christianity remained uninjured, the major part of the barbarians 
having accepted Christianity previously, and the others soon after their 
settlement in the empire. The dignity and influence of the bishops of 
the Christian Church were greatly increased. In the loss of all rule 
and authority, and the absence of all confidence in the local magis- 
tracy during the last years of the empire, and after its dissolution, the 
Christian bishop remained the sole representative of law, the only 
one respected and trusted by the people. His position was indepen- 
dent of political changes : his sympathies were with the people, with 
whose social condition he was well acquainted, and who recognised 
in him a friend and benefactor. Especially was this the case of the 
Bishop of Rome, upon whom the absence of the emperors placed no 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 199 

small share of the burden and responsibility for the peace of that 
city. The dignity of the see arose out of its associations with the 
supposed primacy of Peter and with the seat of the imperial govern- 
ment, which, in the absence of the emperor, was best represented by 
the bishop the Pope. The precedence voluntarily yielded and 
recognised was soon claimed as a right. Innocent I. was Pope 
402-417 A.D. Upon his mind "appears first distinctly to have 
dawned the vast conception of Rome's ecclesiastical supremacy, dim 
as yet and shadowy, yet full and comprehensive in its outline. 
While Honorius was losing the provinces of the empire. Innocent 
was asserting his almost despotic spiritual authority over them : his- 
influence was felt in the Eastern Church, and it is to his credit 
that he supported the cause of the eloquent Chrysostom against the 
corrupt imperial court of Constantinople, 403-407 A.D. The secret 
of the power of the Roman bishops lay in their complete identifica- 
tion with the spirit of the age. This sympathy with the general 
mind of Christendom constituted their strength. They became the 
masters of the Western Church by being the representatives, the 
centre of its feelings and opinions." J Following the example of 
Innocent, one of the greatest of the popes, LEO I., THE GREAT (so called 
justly), obtained from Valentinian III. an edict, 445 A.D., in which 
he admits " the primacy of the Apostolic See of Rome," and com- 
mands the whole world to acknowledge it as " its director andi 
governor"; adding that the papal decisions (in Church affairs) 
" have the force of law, and are to be enforced by the secular 
authorities," 2 as "thereby only can the peace of the Church be 
preserved." Leo I. was the real founder of the papacy. " It is in this- 
spontaneous chieftainship that we recognise one of the most effective 
elements of the subsequent political greatness of the Romish Bishops. 
The decaying mass of civil institutions became as manure at the 
root of the papacy." After the success of Leo's interview with Attila,. 
we need not wonder that, having saved the existence of Rome, men> 
regarded him as its rightful governor. " He stood equally alone 
and superior in the Christian world." 3 Other popes persevered in 
carrying out the policy of Leo. Gelasius (452-498 A.D.) maintained 
with vigour the same policy, the key-note of which was the superiority 
of the spiritual over the secular power. GREGORY L, THE GREAT 
(590-604 A.D.), relieved from all control of the emperors of the 

1 Milman, "History of Christianity," vol. i. pp. 87-121. 

2 Evremond, vol. i. 

3 Milman, " History of Christianity," vol. i. p. 178. , 



200 From the Division of the Empire to the 

East by the Lombard conquest of Italy, opposed the title of 
" Universal Patriarch," assumed by the Bishop of Constantinople, 
and at the same time defended the independence of the city of 
Rome from the attacks of the Lombards. Gregory III. (726-737 
A.D.), annoyed by the iconoclastic policy of the emperors of 
Constantinople, repudiated the jurisdiction of that court, on the 
ground that " the Pontiff of Rome is the only arbiter and judge of 
the Christian community, both in the East and in the West," and, 
in the name of St. Peter, " whom every region in the world wor- 
shipped as God upon earth." Under Gregory the Great the ritual of 
the Church assumed a more perfect and magnificent form, which 
was increased by following pontiffs. At this time the Church of 
Rome possessed large estates in Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, Dal- 
matia, Illyria, Gaul, and even in Africa and the East, of which Gregory 
was a faithful administrator. From the papal estates in Sicily came 
the chief supplies of corn which fed the diminishing, yet still vast, 
poor population of Rome. In the great controversies which agitated 
the Eastern Church the popes up to Gregory II. (715 A.D.) were 
subject to some severe and unjust treatment from the emperors at 
Constantinople. Gregory II. began the contest with Leo the 
Isaurian, 729 A.D., which was carried on by his successors. 
Gregory III., by his resolute action, "marks the period of transition 
from the old to the new political system of Europe : they proclaimed 
the severance of all connexion with the East .... Latin Christen- 
dom is forming into a separate realm, of which the Pope is the head. 
Henceforth the Pope, if not a temporal sovereign, is a temporal 
potentate." l But the next point, territorial sovereignty -, was soon 
achieved. Ever since the extinction of the Western Empire had eman- 
cipated the ecclesiastical potentate from secular control, the first and 
most abiding object of his scheme and prayer had been the acqui- 
sition of territorial wealth in the neighbourhood of his capital. He 
had, indeed, a sort of justification, for Rome, a city without either 
trade or industry, was crowded with- poor, for whom it devolved on 
>the bishop to provide. Yet the pursuit was one which could not 
fail to pervert the purposes of the popes, and give a sinister character 
to all they did." 3 By the help of the Franks the popes were freed 
from the Lombards and the Eastern Emperors. This help was most 
pertinaciously sought, and backed by argments suited to the end de- 
signed. Stephen II., 754A.D.,in his letter toPepinand his sons, reminds 

1 Milman, i. 217. 

2 Bryce, " History of the Roman Empire," pp. 42, 43. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 201 

them of " the promise which they made to St. Peter, the doorkeeper 
of heaven, to restore the exarchate to St. Peter." In 755 A.D., in a 
letter sent " by the order of the Apostle Peter," both St. Peter and 
the Virgin Mary are represented as conjuring Pepin, &c., to imme- 
diate action on pain of eternal punishment. Pepin compelled the 
King of the Lombards to give up Ravenna, Emilia, Pentapolis, to the 
papacy (755 A.D.), which claimed all that had been held by the 
Eastern Emperors. In Rome itself we still read of a republic and 
senate, yet always in connexion with the pontificate, which was 
supreme. Pope Stephen assumed that Pepin, having accepted the 
crown at his hand (at St. Denis, 754 A.D.), had sworn fealty to the 
pontiff. In 774 A.D. Charlemagne ratified the donations of his 
father Pepin. " The diploma which contained the solemn gift was 
placed upon the altar of St. Peter .... the original has long 
perished. It is said to have comprehended the whole of Italy, the 
exarchate of Ravenna, from Istria to the frontiers of Naples, including 
the island of Corsica." 1 Pope Honorius I., in 776 A.D., was tempted 
for the first time to put forth the claims to an extensive dominion, 
supposed to have been granted by Constantine to Pope Sylvester, 
together with "supreme power over all the regions of the West." 3 
There can be no doubt that the great sovereigns connected with 
these grants thought it desirable to admit and further the papal 
power in all ecclesiastical affairs, and were also anxious to secure a 
territorial status for the Pope, by whom alone the clergy could be 
protected in the independent discharge of their clerical duties. No 
one at that time could foresee the evils ultimately arising out of this 
papal supremacy, while the present advantages were so obvious, that 
whatever public opinion existed was in its favour. Pope Leo III. 
designed the new suburb on the left bank of the Tiber, which was 
afterwards carried out by Leo IV., 847-855 A.D., and called "the 
Leonine City." 

14. The Western Church was fully employed in the task of im- 
parting the rudiments of Christian truth to the pagan population of 
the old empire, increased by addition of a large pagan population, 
which entered along with the Christian Burgundians and Visigoths. 
It had also to grapple with the Arianism of these Burgundians and 
Goths, and to bring them to the orthodox faith. Missions to the 
German tribes were carried on by Boniface and others 715-755 A.D. 
Boniface founded the monastery at Fulda, and was murdered by the 
heathen at Dockheim in Frisia 755 A.D. St. Columban, a British 

1 Milman, i. 261. 2 Greenwood, iii. 24-32. 



2O2 From the Division of the Empire to the 

missionary, also laboured in Germany 573-615 A.D. He founded 
the Abbey of Bobbio in Lombardy 612 A.D. This British Church 
was actively engaged in missionary labour ; it had missions in Scot- 
land and Ireland. Ninian (410-432 A.D.) was the apostle of the 
Picts. Palladius and Patrick laboured in Ireland in the fifth century; 
St. Columba founded the monastery of lona 520-596 A.D. ; he was 
the leading spirit among the CULDEES (i.e., cultores Dei) of the old 
British Church, which had been established before the Saxon con- 
quest of England. Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine on a 
mission to the Anglo-Saxon King of Kent, 596 A.D., which, in the 
long run, was successful. It is said the Nestorians had a mission in 
North China so early as 630 A.D. 

The doctrinal controversies chiefly arose in the Eastern Church, 
though the Pelagian controversy was, for the most part, confined to 
the West. Pelagius endeavoured, sometimes unguardedly, to vin- 
dicate freewill as against absolute predestination. By the influence 
of St. Augustine (of Hippo) and of St. Jerome, the decision of the 
Church was in favour of the Augustinian theory, which we now call 
Calvinism, 390-400 A.D. In the East the controversies had special 
reference to the divine nature and the relation of the three persons 
in the Trinity. The third general council at Ephesits, 431 A.D., 
condemned Pelagius and the speculations of the Nestorians on the 
relations and conditions of the divine and human nature in Christ. 
In the fourth general council at Chalcedon, 451 A.D., the Monophysite 
heresy of Eutychius, which confounded the godhead and man- 
hood of Christ into one nature, and the opposite heresy of 
Nestorius, which appeared to divide the godhead and manhood of 
Christ, were alike condemned. This council admitted the supre- 
macy of the Bishop of Rome, and asserted an equal position for the 
Bishop of Constantinople. The fifth general council (the second 
of Constantinople), 553 A.D., confirmed the acts of Justinian the 
emperor on some points of doctrine. The Emperor Zeno endea- 
voured to moderate extreme opinions by his edict of union (the 
Henoticon), 482 A.D. The sixth general council, 680 A.D. (the third 
of Constantinople), condemned the Monothelite heresy, and declared 
the faith of the Church to be that "there were two wills and modes 
of operation in Christ, corresponding to his two natures ; that these 
were without division, and without opposition or confusion, the 
human will being always subordinate to that which is divine and 
almighty." Gibbon sneers at the topics discussed in these councils, 
regards the disputes "alike scandalous to the Church, alike per- 
nicious to the state " (chap, xlvii.). So also Sismondi (the able Pro- 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 203 

testant rationalist) speaks of " the theological subtleties .... the 
examination of them fatigues the reason, and appears a sort of 
blasphemy against that inscrutable Being, who is thus submitted to 
a kind of moral dissection." 1 The points in discussion are here 
misstated. They did not refer to the essence of the divine nature, 
but to the exact meaning of the Holy Scripture as to the person of 
the Christ. The councils give their reply to the question, "What 
readest thou ? " They set on one side as altogether irrelevant all 
a priori assumptions drawn from the name of father and son as used 
to express human relations, and confined themselves to the language 
and teaching of Scripture. These questions were forced upon the 
Church by individual speculators. Possibly, as Gibbon remarks, 
that all parties " were more solicitous to explore the nature than 
practise the laws of their founder": but this human infirmity is no 
reason why trie combined wisdom of the ruling minds of the Church 
should not labour to clear away the fogs and mists by which subtle 
minds had darkened the simplicity of the Christian creed. Their 
decisions are founded on the teachings of the gospels and the 
epistles, and as such, and not merely because so ruled by the 
councils, they have been received almost universally by the Christian 
Churches. We have reason to be thankful for this timely exercise 
of the acuteness of the great theologians of the fourth up to the 
seventh century, by which the plain declarations of Scripture have 
been cleared from the obscurities of a philosophy falsely so called. 
The seventh general council (the second of Nicea), held 787 A.D., 
permitted the religious veneration of images, and declared that the 
elements in the Lord's Supper are not figures, but the very body 
and blood of our Lord. This decision settled the long dispute 
begun by the Emperor Leo the Isaurian, 717-726 A.D., who had 
forbidden the adoration of images, though opposed by John of 
Damascus. This worship was also opposed by the Emperor 
Charlemagne, in a council at Frankfort and in a treatise put out by 
his authority ; but the mass of the population both in the east and 
the west preferred the use of sensible objects in worship, 2 and being 
supported by the Roman pontiffs, through an undue sympathy with 
the weakness of the great majority of Christians, carried out the 
decision of the seventh general council, a council not acknowledged 
by Protestant Churches. The Paulirian heresy, which appears to 
have grafted upon a very imperfect Christian theology some Oriental 

1 " History of the Fall of the Roman Empire," i. 271. 

2 Exodus xxxii. 9. 



204 From the Division of the Empire to the 

notions of the eternity of matter, a duality of deities, the rejection 
of the sacraments, 660 A.D., spread through Asia Minor and beyond, 
and gave some trouble to the Eastern Empire. The seceders from 
the Eastern Greek Church, whose views had been condemned by 
the councils, the Nestorians, Monophysites, Jacobites, Armenians, 
Copts, &c., were chiefly found in the districts which, in the seventh 
century, had been conquered by the Mahometans. They were thus 
left free to hold and spread their views unmolested. In this period 
" will worship," pure human inventions in the shape of self-mor- 
tifications, were fostered by the superstition of the people ; the 
ridiculous shape it sometimes assumed was no hindrance to its 
popularity. St. Symeon (Stylites) was the first of the pillar saints; 
he lived thirty-six years on the summit of a pillar (forty miles from 
Antioch), and was regarded as " an ornament and honour to re- 
ligion " by Theodoret the historian. He died 459 A.D. Monachism, 
which had obtained a complete domination over public opinion in 
the East, was spread in the West by St. Martin of Tours, who died 
400 A.D. ; and by John Cassian, who died 432 A.D. ; also by St. 
Honoratus, Bishop of Aries, 426 A.D. ; and by St. Vincent of Lerius, 
who died 450 A.D. St. Vincent is the author of the great test ot 
Catholic truth, accepted by the early Church namely, " antiquity, 
universality, and common consent." The monastic institution 
derived fresh importance among the barbarous kingdoms. St. 
Benedict of Nursia (Umbria), 480-543 A.D., founded the famous 
monasteries of Subiaco and Monte Casino (Calabria), and carried out 
great reforms, which gave increased influence to the Benedictine 
order. This order, by its literary labours, has maintained the high 
character of its founder. Pictures began to be objects of more than 
ordinary reverence in the Church, and the Virgin Mary began to be 
invoked as a mediator; relics and holy places were much praised 
and honoured. The use of liturgies in public worship and the 
adoption of the creeds the Nicene, that of the Apostles, and the 
(so-called) Athanasian Creed were universal. The Apostles' Creed 
followed the Nicene. The Athanasian probably originated in the 
school of St. Augustine. It first appeared in Gaul about the middle 
of the fifth century. Waterland ascribes it to St. Hilary, Bishop of 
Aries, 430 A.D., others to Vigilius of Thapsus (Africa), 484 A.D. A 
remarkable reform in the monasteries was carried out by Benedict 
of Aniane, 774-784 A.D., who adopted the great reform of his 
predecessor, St. Benedict of Nursia. In the east the Nestorians 
laboured with great zeal to extend Christianity in Persia, India, and 
China. A monument found in Sigan (China) proves that Chris- 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 205 

tianity was introduced there in 636 A.D., and that a Christian 
community existed until 780 A.D., when they were stamped out by 
persecution. 1 

15. (10) LITERARY HISTORY from 395-800 A.D. Literature was 
checked by the troubles and unsettlement of the barbarian invasion 
of the empire. The Latin language became gradually corrupted, 
though mainly used in the courts, the tribunals, and in the churches 
in west Europe and Italy. It was maintained and preserved in the 
Christian Church by the use of the old Italic version, and then by 
the Vulgate of St. Jerome, and the Latin liturgies and service. 

" Jerome's translation is a wonderful work It almost created 

a new language The Vulgate was, even more than the papal 

power, the foundation of Latin Christianity." 3 In the seventh 
century the sermons were in the Latin language. In or about 
750 A.D., the rustic patois in Gaul was rapidly superseding the Latin 
as the language of common life, and in 816 A.D. a council at Tours 
directed that the homilies should be explained in the rustic dialects, 
and in the language of the Franks. Thus, by degrees, the founda- 
tion was laid for the modern languages of France, Italy, Spain, as 
well as in England and Germany. Schools were established by the 
clergy in common with the churches and monasteries; the education 
was framed on the old " trivium and quadrivium," a course of 
seven sciences viz., "grammar, logic, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, 
music, and astronomy." This was the curriculum of the schools 
from the sixth century. In Ireland, through the labours of 
the missionaries, there were some glimpses of light in the sixth and 
seventh centuries, also in England and Scotland. Theodore, the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, a Greek of Tarsus, with his friend 
Adrian, 668 A.D., did much to keep up the knowledge of Latin, and 
perhaps of Greek, from which Bede of Yarrow, " the venerable " 
historian, 622-735 A.D., and Alcuin of York, the friend of Charle- 
magne, 735-804 A.D., probably profited. Among the Lombards in 
Italy and the Merovingians of France literature declined. Some 
think the fifth and sixth centuries to have been the very darkest ot 
the dark ages. 

But in spite of this decline some few adorned literature. St. 
JEROME who, in 386 A.D., left Rome, after revising the old Italic 
Bible; while at Bethlehem he made his new translation "The 
Vulgate," 405 A.D. ; he died September 30, 420 A.D. Vincent of 
Lerius, already referred to as the author of " The Commonitorium," in 

1 Mosheim, Soames, ii. 61, 62. * Milman, i. 24. 



206 From the Division of the Empire to the 

which he laid down the rule, " Teneamus quod ubique, quod semper, 
quod ab omnibus creditum est," a valuable, but not infallible, test of 
truth, 434 A.D. ST. AUGUSTINE, the great theologian of the West, 
became Bishop of Hippo, 395 A.D., and died about 430 A.D., during 
the siege of the city by the Vandals ; " he organised Latin theology, 
brought Christianity into the minds and hearts of men by his 
impassioned autobiography, and finally, under the name of ' the City 
of God,' established [the idea of] that new and undefined kingdom 
at the head of which the Bishop of Rome was hereafter to place 
himself as sovereign." The treatise itself contemplated no such 
external or visible autocracy, but it prepared the way for it in the 
minds of men. 1 Then followed the writings of one who, from his 
high position and personal influence, was listened to. Pope Leo 
the Great, in 451 A.D., wrote his treatise on the Incarnation. "It 
may be admitted that a clearer and more logical analysis of Scripture, 
and of Scripture only, could hardly have been penned," equally 
hostile to the theories of the Nestorians and Eutychians. 3 Pope 
Gregory I. (the Great), 590-604 A.D., a sincere but narrow theologian, 
jealous of secular literature, thought that images, &c., in the churches 
were, in the absence of books, a valuable means in popular in- 
struction, and that relics of saints and martyrs ought to be honoured ; 
he thought that there were sins which might be forgiven in the life 
to come, and that masses on earth might lessen the amount of 
punishment in the intermediate state. The sacramental ritual of 
the Romish Church was established by him, and now remains ; his 
superstitious tendencies have proved most injurious to the spirituality 
of the Latin Church. BOETIUS the philosopher and, for a time, the 
friend of Theodoric, the King of the Goths, in Italy, when in prison, 
while awaiting his death on a charge of treason, 524 A.D., wrote his 
famous work " De Consolatione," &c., in which he collects all the 
comfort that philosophy can give to one in his trying position. By 
his use of Plato, Zeno, and Aristotle, he helped to recommend 
their philosophical studies to the clergy and scholars of his day. 
Besides these leading names, there were, in Gaul, Sidonius 
Apollinaris, the poet, 438-468 A.D. ; Gregory of Tours, historian 
and theologian, 540 A.D. ; Hilary of Aries, the opponent of Leo I. 
on questions of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, 429-449 A.D. In Britain, 
Gildas, 500 A.D. ; Caedmon, 600 A.D. ; Sampson Nennius, 600 A.D. ; 
Bede, historian, 673-735 A - D - I n Spain, Orosius of Tarragona, 
historian and theologian, and a friend of St. Augustine and St. 

1 Milman, i. 79. 2 Greenwood, vol. i. 365. 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 207 

Jerome, 390-417 A.D. ; Isidore of Seville, theologian and historian, 
the greatest luminary of the Visigothic court, 595-636 A.D. ; St. Ilde- 
fonzo, theologian, 600-667 A.D. ; St. Julian of Toledo, theologian and 
historian, 667-691 A.D. That these, with many others of less note, 
were able in that distracted period to engage in literary pursuits, 
while surrounded by barbarian influences, is remarkable. 

In the East the Neo-Platonic Philosophy had ceased to be taught 
in Athens, 529 A.D. Synesius, the philosophic Bishop of Ptolemais 
(Cyrene), who claimed to be a descendant of Hercules, used his 
powers as bishop to put down the oppression of the Governor of 
Libya, 410 A.D. Warburton calls him "a no small fool .... a 
platitude as extravagant and absurd as any." Being scarcely even a 
nominal Christian, he is a great favourite with Gibbon, who says that 
" the philosophic bishop supported with dignity the character 
which he had assumed with reluctance." With more reason he is 
applauded by Kingsley as a noble muscular Christian bishop. 
ST. CHRYSOSTOM, of Antioch and Constantinople (400-438 A.D.), the 
great and eloquent theologian, had to combat and suffer for faithful- 
ness to his office; Theophylact (602-628 A.D.) and Syncellus 
(700 A.D.) are the historians of the Eastern Church; Cyril of 
Alexandria (412-444 A.D.) with John of Damascus (700-750 A.D.) 
are. with Chrysostom, great authorities in the Greek Church. One 
grammarian at Constantinople may be noticed, Priscian, who lived 
468 or 525 A.D., whose name is often used as the representative of 
" grammar." 

From the accession of the Abasside dynasty of khalifs in Bagdad 
the cultivation of science was assisted by the patronage of the 
khalifs. Translations of all the scientific books of the Greeks were 
made into Arabic. The dynasty was remarkable for its free and 
liberal notions, so different from those of the early khalifs, and 
has been charged with a secret sceptical indifference towards the 
teachings of orthodox Mahometanism. 



State of the World at the close of this Period. 

EUROPE. 

SCANDINAVIA. Denmark and Sweden i.e., south of Lake Malar 
united under the King of Denmark. Norway a separate 
kingdom. 

BRITISH ISLES. England was rapidly approaching to the union 



2O8 From the Division of the Empire to the 

of its heptarchy under Egbert. Scotland had (i) the Picts 
(Caledonians) on the north and east ; the seat of their king was 
either Inverness or on the Tay ; they are supposed to have been 
partly Teutons and partly Kelts. (2) The Scots (Irish Gaels) 
who came from Ireland and settled in Argyleshire, 250 A.D., 
and began the kingdom of Dalreada, 500 A.D. (3) The 
Strathclyde Welsh occupied all the west of England, north 
of Chester, and west of Scotland ; their capital, Dumbarton. 
(4) Lothian, the south-eastern portion of Scotland, was 
occupied by northern tribes connected with the Saxon kingdom 
of Northumbria ; chief town, Edinburgh on the Forth. 
Ireland, at a very remote period, appears to have had settlers 
of a highly civilised character, quite different from any popu- 
lation known in historic times, probably Carthaginian. The 
present race appear to have been Kelts and Berbers from 
Spain, afterwards mixed up with a few Teutons ; they were 
called Scots, and Ireland was known as Scotia until the 
eleventh century. The Irish were always, with few excep- 
tions, a wild and lawless people, nominally under the rule of 
four principal and a large number of petty chiefs. St. Patrick 
was their first Christian missionary in the fifth century. 

GERMANY, west of the Oder, under Charlemagne ; eastward, the 
Slavons, the Avars, &c. 

GAUL, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, under Charle- 
magne. 

ITALY : North Italy, the Duchy of Benevento, the Exarchate. 
Corsica, under Charlemagne ; by grant to the Pope, Rome, 
&c. ; Duchy of Benevento, a fief under Charlemagne ; much 
of the south of Italy, Sicily, and Sardinia under the Eastern 
empire, besides the Exarchate. 

SPAIN : Gallicia, the Asturias under the successor of the Gothic 
Don Pelayo from 714 A.D. ; there was also a small Christian 
kingdom in Murcia, but it was absorbed by the Mahometans, 
756 A.D. Charlemagne had possession of a strip of territory 
south of the Pyrenees which was called the Spanish march (as 
a check on the Mahometans). Abderahman, of the family of 
the Ommiyade dynasty, which had been supplanted, 750A.D. y 
by the Abassides, took refuge in Spain and founded the 
khalifat of Cordova, which ruled over two-thirds of Spain. 

THE EASTERN EMPIRE still possessed the territory from the 



Revival of the Empire of the West by Charlemagne. 209 

Adriatic, south of the Danube to the Black Sea ; but Illyria 
and Greece were partly occupied by Sclavonic tribes only 
nominally subject to the empire. The north-west corner was 
Servia, a Sclavonic state also nominally bound to the empire. 
The Bulgarians north of the Danube revolted from the Avars, 
619 A.D., and crossed the Danube, and founded an inde- 
pendent kingdom in Moesia in 678 A.D. ; in 815 A.D., 
re-crossed the Danube, and founded the South Bulgarian 
empire, north of the Danube. 

NORTH and WEST of the Black Sea were the Avars in Hungary, 
&c. (much humbled by Charlemagne), the Magyars (Transyl- 
vania), the Khazars extending to the Caspian, the Patzinacites, 
the Russians to the north of these, the kingdom of Biarindan 
beyond and further north than the Russians ; but all these 
barbarous races were more or less nomads, and their positions 
and their very names are continually changing, so that it is 
difficult to identify them. 



ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR and Crete still part of the Eastern Empire. 

ALL ASIA, from the Mediterranean to the Indus, under the 
Khalifs of Bagdad (the Abassides). 

INDIA. Buddhism in the ascendant, 600-800 A.D. 

CHINA. After great discord, the Suy Dynasty, 590 A.D. ; much 
troubled by the barbarians. The Tang Dynasty, 618 A.D. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT under the Khalifs of Bagdad. 

NORTH AFRICA to the far west, as yet under the Khalifs of Bagdad ; 
very soon to be separated. The Edrisites in Fez, 782 A.D. ; 
the Aghabites in Tunis at Kairwoon, 800 A.D. 



SEVENTH PERIOD, 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the 
Crusades, 1096 A.D. 



I. The Empire of Charlemagne. 

i. THE revival of the Roman Empire in the West was not intended 
to be a mere continuation of the line which ended with Romulus Augus- 
tulus. The new empire was that which was supposed to be identified 
with the great power to which the western nationalities had always 
been accustomed to look with respect and deference. Constanti- 
nople and the Eastern Emperors were to a great extent outside of the 
sphere of practical action in the West. Rome, in its dangers and 
trials from Alaric, Attila, and others, had received no help from 
Constantinople. The interference of Justinian had destroyed the 
Gothic monarchy, which had bid fair to identify itself with the 
nation, and had thus prepared the way for the Lombard rule, which 
had proved more annoying than any other barbarian government. 
A woman, too, was governing in Constantinople ; her character 
commanded no respect, and she could afford no protection. The 
feeling of the day is represented by the "Old Annals" of Lauresheim, 
quoted by Bryce, p. 53 : "And because the name of emperor had 
now ceased among the Greeks, and their empire was possessed by a 
woman, it then seemed both to Leo, the Pope himself, and to 
all the holy fathers who were present in the selfsame council, as 
well as the rest of the Christian people, that they ought to take to 
be emperor Charles, King of the Franks, who held Rome itself, where 
the Caesars had always been wont to sit." There were other reasons ; 
one assigned by Hallam, i. 123, was the investing Charlemagne's 
dignity with the character of sacredness in the eyes of his barbarian 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 211 

subjects, who had been accustomed to hear of emperors as superior 
to kings his rule was thereby changed at once from a dominion of 
force to a dominion of law. 1 Another, given by Maine, in his work 
on Ancient Law, pp. 103, 107, "The barbarians knew nothing of 
territorial sovereignty ; their kings ruled over Franks, Burgundians, 
Lombards, c. To be something more than this there was only 
one precedent in the title of Emperor of Rome ; the moment a 
monarch departed from the special relation of chief to clansmen, he 
must take the full prerogative of the Roman emperor, or he had no 
political status whatever." 2 The power and rights of the new 
emperor were differently interpreted by the two parties foremost in 
the transfer of the imperial dignity. Charles, no doubt, considered 
his power over Rome the same as that which he exercised over his 
other conquests. The Pope supposed the emperor to stand simply 
as the defender of the papacy in the exercise of the Pope's spiritual 
and temporal rule. Charles, as Roman emperor, and his German 
successors claimed and exercised for ages great privileges, implying 
a primacy over the sovereigns of Europe until the year 1806 A.D., 
when Francis II. of Austria announced to the German Diet his 
resignation of the imperial crown. "If the name of the Roman 
empire still presented to the inhabitants of Europe, after so long an 
interruption, ideas of greatness and superior power, it was not a 
vain flattery which caused the title of emperor to be renewed, in 
order to bestow it upon Charlemagne. Since Diocletian .... none 
of his successors could be compared to the King of the Franks, 
either for the extent of his states or for the strength of his armies. 
The new Empire of the West was not, however, composed of the 
same provinces as the old : the Saracen had despoiled Christianity 
of Africa and Spain, and Charles had only re-conquered a small 
part of the latter. But to make amends he had regained on the 
north a territory nearly equal to that which the empire had lost in 
the south. All Germany obeyed him as far as the mouths of the 
Elbe and the Oder ; and that half-savage country furnished Charles- 
more valiant soldiers than the ancient emperors could have drawn 
from Numidia or Mauritania." 3 "No claim can be more ground- 
less than that which the modern French, the sons of the Latinised 
Kelt, set up to the Teutonic Charles." 4 " French history, as it is 
commonly presented to Englishmen, exists only through a systematic 



1 Freeman's " Essays," p. 175. 2 Student's " History of France," pp. 83, 84. 

3 Sismondi, " History of the Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. i. pp. 268, 269, 

4 Bryce, p. 71. 



212 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

misrepresentation of imperial history. Till all French influences are 
wholly cast aside and trampled under foot, the true history of the 
'holy Roman empire can never be understood.'" 1 The empire of 
Karl der Grosse (Charlemagne) was the Teutonic empire which stands 
between two long periods of tumult and disorder, the empire to 
which the France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, and 
Holland of our day may trace their origin. Of all the Teutonic 
races which occupied north-eastern Gaul, east and west of the Rhine, 
the Austrasian Teutons were " the true-born Rhenish Franks," and 
with them the Thuringians, the Alemanni, the Bavarians, and the 
Burgundians ; to these Karl der Grosse was most intimately allied. 
The Neustrian Teutons were to a large extent already Romanised. 
The seat of the new empire was at Aix-la-Chapelle, in Germany, the 
most convenient position as the head-quarters of a ruler whose whole 
life was spent in defending and extending his northern and eastern 
frontiers. " The unity of the empire was a boon required by the 
exigency of the time, and that by means of it Charlemagne preserved 
Christendom from the encroachments of paganism, at that time still 
prevailing in the east, and from those of the Mahomedans equally 
powerful in the south, besides refining the barbarian manners of the 
age, by the introduction of the arts of civilisation and of scholastic 
learning, form his great and all-sufficing exculpation." 2 The grand 
idea of the holy Roman empire, re-established by Germans, though 
never realised fully, was for ages dear to the German people (the 
noble families). The power of CHARLEMAGNE, by which this idea 
was for a long period partially realised, was the result of extra- 
ordinary labour. In the course of his life he had made fifty-three 
campaigns, of which eighteen were against the Saxons, one against 
the Thuringians, one against the Bavarians, one against the Acqui- 
tanians, five against the Lombards, five against the Saracens in Italy, 
seven against the Saracens in Spain, two against the Avars, four 
against the Slavi beyond the Elbe, three against the Danes, and two 
against the Greek empire in Italy. Germany gained by Charle- 
magne to Christianity and civilisation, and proved in her day to be 
the most powerful bulwark against the barbarians of the north and 
east, is the greatest result of his labours. It may yet be to our, or 
to a future, age the great barrier in the way of Sclavonic aggression, 
headed by Russia. 

2. The empire of Charlemagne consisted of (i) Austrasia (the 
north-west of Gaul and part of Germany), on both sides of the 

1 Freeman, " Essays," first series, p. 301. 2 Menzel, vol. i. p. 231. 



From the Empire of CJiarlemagne to the Crusades. 213 

Rhine : chief towns, Aix-la-Chapelle ; Metz on the Moselle ; Duilia 
(Diiren on the Rhine); Landen (west of the Meuse); Heristal on 
the Meuse (the estate and residence of the elder Pepin); Treves; 
Magontia (Mayence) ; Ingleheim on the Rhine, where the emperor 
had his favourite palace ; Frankfort ; Wurtzburg ; Theodoris Villa 
(Thionville) on the Moselle; Laon; and Wormatia (Worms). (2) 
Neustria, bounded by the Meuse, the Loire, and the ocean to the 
west of Austrasia ; it included Brittany, which was under control of 
the empire : the chief towns were Paris (the favourite capital of the 
Merovingians) ; Sithin (S. Omer) ; Bononia (Boulogne) ; Soissons, 
and Tours on the Loire. (3) Burgundy, including part of east Gaul 
and all Switzerland : chief towns, Lyons and Geneva. (4) Aquitania, 
including Vasconia (Gascony) ; Septimania, the Spanish Marches ; 
Corsica and the Balearic Isles : chief towns, Tolosa (Toulouse) ; 
Bordeaux; Barcelona; Nimes ; Narbonne. (5) Frizia : Deventer, 
on the Yssel, the chief town. (6) Saxony (to the borders of Denmark) : 
chief towns, Buckholz; Badenfield; Paderborn; Bremen; Hamburg. 
(7) Alsatia, Alsace : chief town, Strasburg. (8) Alemannia (Baden), 
Wurtemberg, and part of Switzerland : chief towns, Constance, St. 
Gall, Chur. (9) Bavaria: chief towns, Ratisbon ; Saltzburg. (10) 
Karinthia : chief town, Villack. (n) Avaria, north-east of Karin- 
thia, between Ems, skirting the Danube to the Theiss, called the 
Austrian frontier, now Austria. (12) Italy, with the subject 
Duchy of Beneventum. (13) Friuli (Istria, Liburnia, Dalmatia), 
Friuli, now Udine, Capo dTstria, belonging to the Eastern Empire. 
(14) The Croats, as far as the river Celtina, near Spalatro; Venice, 
though independent, did homage to Charlemagne, 806 A.D. The 
SCLAVONIC tribes beyond the Elbe were controlled by the establish- 
ment of the Eastern Marches, or border districts, which extended 
from the Elbe all along the Bohemian and Carpathian Mountains to 
the Theiss, the lower Danube, the Save, and the Dalmatian moun- 
tains on the Mediterranean. But this vast empire, in which so large 
an amount of warlike, unsettled, discontented barbarians had been 
incorporated, had within itself the seeds of its dissolution. The 
conquerors were even more exhausted than the conquered, for the 
diminution of the able-bodied warrior population increased yearly 
the difficulty of recruiting the armies, and the consequent inability 
to maintain powerful armies at once in the south, the east, and the 
north. The Danes, the Slavi, the northern pirates in the mouth of 
every navigable river, the Saracens in Italy and the south of France, 
the Bretons, and the Avars troubled the empire on every side, and, 
though repulsed, were not fully repressed. We gather from the 



214 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

monkish and other contemporary chroniclers that the forced union of 
Gaul was a discordant one, as the amalgamation of the races had 
not as yet welded them into one people. Charlemagne himself 
could not always bring the forces of the empire to the particular 
point where immediate action was needed, nor could he more than 
for a time repress the tendency to localise the present resources of 
the empire, regardless of the claims and necessities of the outlying 
and exposed frontiers. The idea of an empire something beyond a 
mere mass of subject tribes ; an idea that amalgamated the masses 
into a state T ; an idea not Teutonic but Roman, was premature. 
Society was averse to it. To some extent, however, all the practical 
advantages of orderly government, the partial rule of law, the 
growth of a middle class and of a strong free population, as well 
as safety from barbarian inroads, were realised in the nations which 
arose out of the dismemberment of the Carlovingian empire. In 
the internal government of this large empire, Charlemagne could do 
little but watch the administration of the laws already existing among 
the various nations. He republished, with a few corrections and 
additions, their ancient laws ; and his capitularies, while they bear 
testimony to a savage and cruel state of feeling, prove the anxiety of 
the emperor to ameliorate the condition of society. Slavery was on 
the increase in the shape of serfdom. Some estates, one especially 
given to the learned Alcuin, had attached to it twenty thousand of 
these bondmen. In the interior of the empire, the security from 
war and from barbarian invasions had led to the discouragement of 
the free proprietors ; their necessity, as soldiers ready on the spot 
to defend the territory, being less evident, the great landholders 
purchased the small properties and managed their estates by serfs 
or slaves. By royal judges, called Missi Dominici, the emperor 
endeavoured to amend the administration of the law and to put 
down local oppressors. In the territories belonging to the crown 
there was a strict economical management enforced. All the serfs 
and slaves, and those who rented farms, were placed under a 
manager, who regulated minutely the care of the cattle and the 
poultry-yard \ the exercise of the mechanical arts by the men and 
the spinning and weaving of the women : these regulations affected 
one fourth of France, and were, no doubt, followed by all the great 
proprietors in the remaining three-fourths of the territory. Sismondi * 
remarks : " How hard must have been the condition of the renters, 
and the slaves and serfs, while thus ruled in all the details of 

1 Bryce, pp. 73, 74. * "History of France." 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 215 

domestic life, and thus deprived of all free will and hope." It is, 
however, very probable, that in practice these minute regulations 
would be modified, and that the serf and the slaves had compensa- 
tions which made life tolerable to them; and it is all but certain that 
this class gradually rose, step by step, to the position of small pro- 
prietors, and became what in French are called " the peasantry " (a 
word which has no right to be used in English history). Charle- 
magne was a patron and friend of learned men and of literature. 
He encouraged trade, opened out roads, protected the Jews and 
the foreign merchants, and was an admirer of the fine arts, especially 
architecture and music ; he died 814 A.D., reverenced by all civilised 
and even barbarian Europe. His character grows in the estimation 
of our modern philosophical historians, who have studied his posi- 
tion and actions from a higher and more comprehensive position 
than the historians of the eighteenth century, who attribute his 
conquests to his ambition and bigotry, and regard the ravages of the 
Normans as carried on by way of revenge for his conduct towards 
the Saxons. 1 Lecky does justice to this great man. " Of all the 
great rulers of men there has probably been no other who was so truly 
many-sided, whose influence pervaded so completely all the religious, 
intellectual, and political modes of thought existing in his time. 
Rising in one of the darkest periods of European history, this great 
emperor resuscitated with a brief but dazzling splendour the faded 
glories of the Empire of the West ; conducted for the most part in 
person numerous expeditions against the barbarous nations around 
him; promulgated a vast system of legislation; reformed the dis- 
cipline of every order of the Church ; reduced all classes of the 
clergy to subservience to his will ; while, by legalising tithes, he greatly 
increased their material prosperity, contributing in a measure to check 
the intellectual decadence by founding schools and libraries, and 
drawing around him all the scattered learning of Europe ; reformed 
the coinage ; extended the commerce ; influenced religious contro- 
versies, and created great representative assemblies, which ultimately 
contributed largely to the organisation of feudalism. In all these 
spheres the traces of his vast organising and far-seeing genius may 
be detected, and the influence which he exercised over the imagina- 
tions of men is shown by the numerous legends of which he is the 
hero. In the preceding ages the supreme ideal had been the 
ascetic .... in the romances of Charlemagne and of Arthur we 
may trace the dawning of another type of greatness ; the hero of the 

1 Hume, vol. i. pp. 67, 68. 



216 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

imagination of Europe was no longer a hermit, but a king, a warrior, 
or a knight .... the age of the ascetics began to fade. The age 
of the Crusades and of chivalry succeeded it." J J. C. Morrison, in his 
" Life of Gibbon," remarks : " Gibbon's account of Charlemagne is 

strangely inadequate He did not realise the greatness of the 

man, of his age, or of his work. Properly considered, the eighth 
century is the most important and memorable which Europe has 
ever seen. During its course, the geographical limits, the ecclesi- 
astical polity, and the feudal system, within and under which our 
western group of nations was destined to live for five or six centuries, 
were provisionally settled and determined. The wonderful house of 
the Carolings, which provided no less than five successive rulers of 
genius, of whom two had extraordinary genius Charles Martel and 
Charlemagne were the human instruments of this great work. 
The Frankish monarchy was hastening to ruin when they saved it. 
Saxons in the east and Saracens in the south were on the point of 
extinguishing the few surviving embers of civilisation which still 

existed Charles and his ancestors prevented this evil . . . . 

the struggle and the care of the hero to master in some degree the 
wide welter of barbarism surging around him, he (Gibbon) never 
recognised" (p. 164). 

II. The Decline of the Carlovingian Empire. 

3. The death of Charlemagne was followed by the succession 
of his son, Louis the Pious, a man of saint-like disposition, 
utterly unfit to rule over the empire. He was twice deposed 
by his unnatural sons, and again restored. On his death, 840 
A.D., Louis the Germanic and Charles the Bald allied against 
their brother Lothaire, who claimed the position of suzerain. 
The Battle of Fontenoy, 841 A.D., was decided against Lothaire, 
who retreated. By the Treaty of Verdun, 843 A.D., Italy, 
with Lotharingia, Burgundy Transjurane, and Burgundy Cisjurane, 
were given to Lothaire, France to Charles the Bald, and Germany 
to Louis II. In 855 A.D. Lothaire died, and his territory was 
divided into Italy, Lorraine, and the Burgundies. Lorraine and the 
Burgundies, 863 and 869 A.D., were reunited to Italy, which was, in 
875 A.D., annexed to France by Charles the Bald. On the death of 
Charles the Fat, 888 A.D., France, Germany, and Italy became 
distinct and separate states. Lorraine, which had been for a time 
separated from Germany, was reunited, 900-959 A.D. Cisjurane 

1 Lecky, " History of European Morals," pp. 288, 289. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 2 1 7 

Burgundy, with Aries, &c., formed a separate kingdom under Boson, 
while Transjurane Burgundy became a kingdom under Rudolf, 
Both these Burgundies were united in 934 A.D. as the kingdom of 
Aries, and in a few years, 1016-1033, were absorbed, partly by 
Germany and partly by France. The petty kingdom of Navarre, 
partly in French and partly in Spanish territory, was, after 831 A.D. T 
attached to Spain. After 963 A.D., Italy became practically a fief of 
the German empire. In reviewing the wars and calamities which 
desolated the empire of Charlemagne from 814-888 A.D. (a period 
of seventy-four years), it is difficult to find words to express our 
detestation of the unnatural paricidal and fratricidal conduct of the 
family of Charlemagne. The civil wars were undoubtedly the result 
partly of a determination on the part of the nationalities to realise 
a separate national existence, a desire which might have been peace- 
ably carried out; but these unnatural sons and brothers managed 
to destroy the family of Charlemagne. They that used the sword 
so readily perished by the sword, and the vast territories composing 
the late empire of Charlemagne were inherited and ruled over by 
strangers to his blood and race. This period of seventy-four years 
" was indeed the nadir of order and civilisation. From all sides 
the torrent of barbarism, which Charles the Great had stemmed, was 
rushing down upon his empire. The Saracen wasted the Mediter- 
ranean coasts and sacked Rome itself; the Dane and Norsemen 
swept the Atlantic and the North Sea, pierced France and Germany 
by their rivers, burning, slaying, carrying off the population into 
captivity; pouring through the Straits of Gibraltar, they fell upon 
Provence and Italy. By land, while Wends, and Czecks, and 
Obo tribes threw off the German yoke and threatened the borders, the 
wild Hungarian bands, pressing in from the steppes of the Caspian,, 
dashed over Germany like the flying spray of a new wave of 
barbarism, and carried the terror of their battle-axes to the Appe- 
nines and the ocean. Under such strokes the already-loosened 
fabric swiftly dissolved. No one thought of common defence or 
wide organisation ; the strong built castles, the weak became their 
bondsmen, or took shelter under the cowl. The governor, count,, 
abbot, or bishop tightened his grasp, turned a delegated into an 
independent, a personal into a territorial authority, and hardly 
owned a distant and feeble suzerain. The grand vision of a 
universal Christian empire was utterly lost in the isolation, the 
antagonism, the increasing localisation of all powers." 1 The 

1 Bryce, pp. 78, 79. 



218 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

tendency towards resident localised authorities for administration 
and defence was irresistible, as was evident from the divisions and 
subdivisions of the Merovingian and the Carlovingian dynasties. It 
was, unfortunately, the necessity of the age. Fiefs had become 
virtually hereditary under the Merovingians, when the possessor was 
strong enough to hold his fiefs, and wise and prudent enough to 
abstain from open rebellion. Charles the Bald, in an assembly of 
the States of France, June 14, 877 A.D.., at Kiersey, published a 
capitulary, in which he engaged to give always to the son of a count, 
c., &c., and as a legal heritage, the position of his father, reserving 
to himself, however, the right of appointing in case the deceased 
had left no son. By this means the rights of those holding fiefs 
direct from the Crown were fully established ; and also the same rule 
was to be applied to all who held land or office under counts, or 
bishops and abbots. " The nobles began to see that their strength 
was based on law." x By the end of the eighth century (900 A.D.) 
there were twenty-nine such fiefs held in France. In the course of 
the tenth century (up to 1000 A.D.) there were fifty-five. The 
advantages connected with a local government were obvious ; the 
danger of weakening the authority of the central power was not 
so easily seen. One good followed, the increased settlement of the 
land by free tenants bound only to military service. 

III. The Feudal System. 

4. Thus, in the decline of the Carlovingian empire, that 
which is called the feudal system of tenure and rule became 
fully established in western, southern, and central Europe. In 
principle, the essential conditions of this system, the existence of 
a suzerain, and under him dependent holders of land subject to 
military service, are observable in the early history of most nations. 
The application of the system, carried out fully and maintained for 
centuries, arose out of the position of our barbarian ancestors. 
They found themselves an army of conquerors, encamped on hostile 
ground, exposed to the revolt of the conquered, and to the rivalry of 
powerful tribes as warlike as themselves. It was the one condition 
of their existence that they should be always prepared as soldiers to 
repress their subjects, and to defend their conquests from competitive 
tribes ; and yet it was also necessary that the land appropriated by 
the conquerors should be settled and cultivated by responsible 
owners. While many of the barbarians held their land direct from 

1 " Encyc. Brit." (France), p. 533. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 219 

the chief, the great landholders, holding direct from the same chief, 
were obliged, by the extent of their possessions, to grant to their 
dependants land in fiefs, to be held by them on conditions of 
military service. The term fief is supposed to be an abbreviation of 
the word used in the Roman imperial law (emphyteusis) to describe 
an estate granted to be held not absolutely, the use only being given 
to the grantee as a mere tenant. Such tenants under the feudal law 
were called vassals, from the Keltic word gways or the Teutonic 
word gesell, meaning a subordinate helper. Words as feum and 
fevum occur in charters of the tenth century, the word feudum in 
the eleventh century. The vassal was invested in his position and 
rights over the property bestowed upon him by solemn forms, which 
appealed to men's religious and moral feelings, and which it was 
deemed impious and infamous to violate. The relation took the 
shape, and was in reality a mutual interchange, of benefits, of bounty 
and protection on the one hand, of gratitude and service due on the 
other. The obligations thus arising were so powerful that the 
ties of relationship were looked upon as inferior to the claims of 
vassal and suzerain upon each other. These fiefs, at first granted 
during good-will, then for life, then hereditary practically, though 
not legally or formally in the direct male line, then hereditary in 
collateral branches of the original grantee, then hereditary in the 
female line. In France the fiefs became formally hereditary in the 
reign of the first Capets ; in Germany, under the Emperor Conrad II. , 
1024 A.D. The system became more complicated when the granting 
of fiefs, at first confined to the supreme power, the sovereign of the 
state, began to be granted by the holders of fiefs to their dependants. 
This was called subinfeudation, and was virtually an alienation of a 
portion of the original fief, by which the vassal of the suzerain 
became himself the mesne lord of others called arrere vassals. This 
arrangement sometimes placed men in difficulty and contrary 
positions. A lord might become the vassal of his own vassal, and 
a vassal lord over his own lord. " While the feudal system lasted, 
everybody, except a few exalted persons, had a suzerain ; even the 
highest in one capacity might be a vassal in another. The world 
was used to a universal overlapping and interlacing of rights and 
obligations." x But there remained for many years lands held by 
proprietors independent of feudal lords. These were the lands 
which remained to the conquered in the original partition enforced 
by the conquerors, and other lands, the possession of great chiefs, 

1 Daily News. 



220 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

held by them as their share of the conquest, and not received from 
the suzerain. These were the allodial lands. An allodial proprietor 
was without a lord, but was also without any claim for protection. 
But so necessary was this protection from a near and superior 
protector in the middle ages, that the larger number of the allodial 
properties were transformed into fiefs by the tenth and eleventh 
centuries. Society consisted of slaves belonging to landed estates, 
vassals holding lands on military tenure, with other minor obligations, 
and lords holding from the suzerain and owing military service to 
him. The lord had his right of military service from his vassals, a 
right of wardship over his vassals who were minors, the giving female 
heirs in marriage, payments when his son was knighted or his 
eldest daughter married, or for his redemption if taken captive ; he 
held courts of law and administered legal and criminal jurisdiction. 
In England, William the Conqueror divided the whole land into 
sixty thousand knight-fees, each bound to serve in the field forty days 
at their own expense. Such was the feudal system, to which our 
European civilisation is so highly indebted. We have been able to 
dispense with it, and no one desires to revive it, even if it were 
possible. The man has outlived the guardianship and the restrictions 
of the nursery and the pedagogue, but he does not revile the 
necessary restrictions imposed upon his childhood and youth. 
Feudality had its uses, and to be able to recognise these, and to do 
justice to their efficiency and results, is just the difference which 
distinguishes the well-informed historical student from the partial 
and prejudiced literary men of the last century. We now give some 
sober judgments of great men to help our readers to a right appre- 
hension of the good and the evil of this system. 

"The notions of loyalty, of honour, of nobility, and of the 
importance, socially and politically, of landed over other property 
are the most striking of the feelings which may be considered to 
have taken their birth from the feudal system. These notions are 
opposed to the tendency of the commercial and manufacturing spirit 
which has been the great moving power of the world since the 
decline of strict feudalism ; but that power has not yet been able to 
destroy, or perhaps even materially to weaken, the opinions above 
mentioned in the minds of the masses. We are not, however, to pass 
judgment upon feudalism, as the originating and shaping principle 
of a particular form into which human society has run, simply 
according to our estimate of the value of these, its relics at the 
present day. The true question is, if this particular organisation 
had not been given to European society, after the dissolution of the 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 221 

ancient civilisation, what other order of things would in all likelihood 
have arisen ? a better or a worse than that which did result ? Some 
assistance in settling this question might, perhaps, be obtained by 
comparing the history of society from this date in the feudal 
countries with its history in those parts of Europe to which feudalism 
never reached France or England, for instance, with Denmark, 
Sweden, and Hungary. As for the state of society during the actual 
prevalence of the feudal system, it was, without doubt, in many 
respects exceedingly defective and barbarous. But the system, with 
all its imperfections, still combined the two essential qualities of 
being both a system of stability and a system of progression. It 
did not fall to pieces, neither did it stand still. Notwithstanding all 
its rudeness, it was, what every right system of polity is, at once 
conservative and productive. And perhaps it is to be most fairly 
appreciated by being considered, not in what it actually was, but in 
what it preserved from destruction and in what it produced." 1 

"It is the previous state of society under the grand-children of 
Charlemagne which we must always keep in mind if we would 
appreciate the effects of the feudal system upon the welfare of 
mankind. The institutions of the eleventh century must be com- 
pared with those of the ninth, not with the advanced civilisation of 
modern times. If the view which I have taken of those dark ages 
is correct, the state of anarchy which we usually term feudal was the 
natural result of a vast and barbarous empire feebly administered, 
and the cause, rather than the effect, of the general establishment of 
feudal tenures. These, by preserving the mutual relations of the 
whole, kept alive the feeling of a common country and commodities, 
and settled, after the lapse of ages, into the free constitution of 
England, the firm monarchy of France, and the federal union of 
Germany. The utility of any form of polity may be estimated by 
its effect upon national greatness and security, upon civil liberty and 
private rights, upon the tranquillity and order of society, upon the 
increase and diffusion of wealth, or upon the general tone of moral 
sentiment and energy. The feudal constitution was certainly, as 
has been observed already, little adapted for the defence of a 
mighty kingdom, far less for schemes of conquest. But, as it pre- 
vailed alike in several adjacent countries, none had anything to fear 
from the military superiority of its neighbours. It was this in- 
efficiency of the feudal militia, perhaps, that saved Europe during 
the middle ages from the danger of universal monarchy. In times 

1 "Feudal System," Penny Encyc., vol. x. pp. 243-248. 



222 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

when princes had little notion of confederacies for mutual pro- 
tection, it is hard to say what might not have been the successes of 
an Otho the Great, a Frederic Barbarossa, or a Philip Augustus, if 
they could have wielded the whole force of their subjects whenever 
their ambition required. If an empire equally extensive with that 
of Charlemagne, and supported by military despotism, had been 
formed about the twelfth or thirteenth centuries, the seeds of com- 
merce and liberty, just then beginning to shoot, would have perished, 
and Europe, reduced to a barbarous servitude, might have fallen 
before the free barbarians of Tartary. If we look at the feudal 
polity as a scheme of civil freedom, it bears a noble countenance. 
To the feudal law it is owing that the very names of right and 
privilege were not swept away as in Asia by the desolating hand of 
power. The tyranny which, on every favourable moment, was 
breaking through all barriers, would have rioted without control 
if, when the people were poor and disunited, the nobility had not 
been brave and free. So far as the sphere of feudality extended, it 

diffused the spirit of liberty and the notions of private right 

But, as a school of moral discipline, the feudal institutions were most 
to be valued. Society had sunk, for several centuries after the dis- 
solution of the Roman Empire, into a condition of utter depravity, 
where, if any vices could be selected as more eminently charac- 
teristic than others, they were falsehood, treachery, and ingratitude. 
In slowly purging off the lees of this extreme corruption the feudal 
spirit exerted its ameliorating influence. Violation of faith stood 
first in the catalogue of crimes most repugnant to the very essence of 
a feudal tenure, most severely and promptly avenged, most branded 
by general infamy. The feudal law books breathe throughout a 
spirit of honourable obligation. . ... In the reciprocal services 
of lord and vassal there was ample scope for every magnanimous and 

disinterested energy From these feelings, engendered by the 

feudal relations, has sprung up the peculiar sentiment of personal 
reverence and attachment towards a sovereign which we denominate 
loyalty ; alike distinguishable from the stupid devotion of Eastern 
slaves and from the abstract respect with which free citizens regard 
their chief magistrate In ages when the rights of the com- 
munity were unfelt, this sentiment was one great preservative of 
society, and, though collateral or even subservient to more en- 
lightened principles, it is still indispensable to the tranquillity and 
permanence of every monarchy. In a moral view, loyalty has 
scarcely, perhaps, less tendency to refine and elevate the heart than 
patriotism itself, and holds a middle place in the scale of human 



From the Empire of CJiarlemagne to the Crusades. 223 

motives, as they ascend from the grosser inducement of self-interest 
to the furtherance of general happiness and conformity to the 
purposes of infinite wisdom." 1 

" The introduction of the feudal regime .... altered the dis- 
tribution of the populations over the face of the country. Until that 
time the masters of the soil, the sovereign class, lived collected in 
masses, more or less numerous, either sedentary in the towns or 
wandering in bands over the country. In the feudal state these 
same persons lived insulated, each in his own habitation, at great 

distances from one another Internal life, domestic society 

are certain here to acquire a great preponderance Was it not 

in the feudal family that the importance of women took its rise ? 
.... Feudalism was a necessity, because society was incapable of 

a better polity It declined when the state of society had 

become compatible with extensive government." 2 One evil traceable 
to the feudal system is the tendency "to enhance every unsocial and 
unchristian sentiment involved in the exclusive respect for birth." 3 
It looked down upon all citizens and the mercantile and trading 
classes. In our day the aristocracy have ceased to be the military 
prop of the nation, and the main support of our country now rests 
upon the agricultural, mercantile, manufacturing, and trading classes 
of society, who have become the dispensers of political power in 
the elections for the House of Commons. 

IV. The Ravages of the Normans, Huns, and Saracens. 

5. The lamentable condition of all classes of society in Western 
Europe, arising partly out of the exhaustion of the free population in 
the necessary aggressive wars of Charlemagne, and in the fratricidal 
wars of his children and grand-children, helps to explain the other- 
wise unaccountable success and continuance of the invasions of the 
Normans, the Hungarians, and the Saracens in the ninth, tenth, and 
eleventh centuries. In reading the details of these barbarian 
ravages, which met with so little resistance, we naturally inquire 
where is the king or emperor ? where the great nobles ? where the 
feudal militia of armed men, who hold their lands by military 
tenure ? They are never found when their presence is needed. 
Here and there a brave noble or the citizens of a walled town offer 
resistance, but generally victory was with the assailants, and then 

1 Hallam's "Middle Ages," eleventh edition, vol. i. pp. 269-272. 
" Abridged from Guizot's "History of Civilisation in France." 
3 Hallam's " Middle Ages," vol. i. p. 321. 



224 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

a great slaughter ; the plunder, consisting of slaves, bullion, and 
cattle, being carried safely away. The rapid extinction of the free 
rural population laid open the empire to these brigands. The great 
lords, at first, generally consulted their own safety by abiding in 
their castles, safe from the attacks of the invader, having no forces 
sufficient to cope with the enemy, " while in the towns and villages 
there was not a place unpolluted by dead bodies." Those who 
submitted as well as those who resisted were massacred, and their 
houses and churches burnt. So jealous were the kings, the suc- 
cessors of Charlemagne in Gaul, of voluntary unions and leagues of 
the peasantry even for protection against the Northmen, that penalties 
of scourging, mutilation, and banishment were inflicted upon the 
parties thus leagued. But these ravagers were soon subdued when 
the feudal organisation was complete; then the marauders were 
encountered by an armed population led by their nobles. The 
feudal lord, though he might be selfish and stern, and inclined to rule 
over his serfs with a high hand, was generally faithful to his duties 
of military defence against these and all invaders of his territory. 

(i) The Normans. The whole coasts of the Baltic, of the Atlantic, 
and of the islands in the northern ocean were, in the ninth and 
tenth centuries, infested by pirates, the Vi-kings issuing forth from 
Norway, Sweden, and Denmark in search of plunder, and, in due 
time, of settlement for their families and followers, for whom there 
appeared to them to be no room in their native lands. Charle- 
magne had planned the building and maintaining a powerful fleet, 
and strong forts at the mouths of the rivers, as defences against 
marauders by sea ; but these had been neglected by his successors, 
who had not a single armed ship on the seas, nor anywhere a 
standing troop of soldiers. The whole extent of coast from the 
Eyder to the Adour, as well as the rivers of France and Germany, 
afforded facilities for sudden attacks and plunder, which were gladly 
embraced. There were three principal positions occupied by them : 
(a) on the Scheldt and the Rhine, from which they devastated 
Flanders, Lower Louvain, and Friesland ; (b) on the Loire, from 
which Hastings carried his merciless inroads as far as Italy; (c) 
on the Seine, from which they burnt Rouen and Paris. The latter 
city was besieged in 886 A.D., and was only saved by the courage 
of its bishop and Count Eudes. Rollo took possession of part 
of Neustria, and received what was then called Normandy as a 
fief from Charles the Simple, 912 A.D. The number and extensive 
area occupied by these inroads is thus depictured by Sir F. Palgrave : 
" Take the map, and cover with vermilion the provinces, districts, 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 225 

and shores which the Northmen visited, as a record of each invasion ; 
the colouring will have to be repeated more than ninety times suc- 
cessively before you arrive at the conclusion of the dynasty of 
Charles the Great. Furthermore, mark by the usual symbol of war 
(two crossed swords) the localities where battles were fought by the 
pirates, where they were defeated or triumphant, or where they 
pillaged, burnt, or destroyed ; and the valleys and banks of the Elbe, 
the Rhine, and Moselle, the Scheldt, the Meuse, Somme, and 
Seine, Loire, Garonne, and Adour, and all the coasts and coast- 
lands between estuary and estuary, all the countries between rivers 
and streams will appear bristling as with chevaux-de-frise." * In 
England they eventually established a dynasty, as also in Naples and 
Sicily, Ireland and the west islands were their regularly visited 
homes, and Scotland did not quite escape their ravages. The 
inroads of the Northmen ceased about the end of the tenth century, 
as soon as the full consolidation of the feudal system had placed 
local authorities in the persons of chiefs interested in the localities 
they governed, and able to call together the armed population to 
resist. (2) The Hungarians (Magyars), originally from the Uralian 
Mountains, driven from the Wolga by the Petchenegans, and from 
the Ukraine by people afterwards called the Russians, arrived in 
Dacia 889 A.D. For about seventy years they carried rapine and 
desolation from the Danube to the German Ocean, to the Maes and 
the Moselle, and even to the Po. Mounted on swift, small horses, 
they passed quickly away when defeated; and their savage habits 
gave them, with their quickness, the reputation of being possessed 
with supernatural power (from 884-955 A.D.). All Europe, espe- 
cially southern France and Spain, were terrified at their progress, 
anticipating their attacks, which were followed by indiscriminate 
massacre. The German emperor and nobles did their duty to 
Germany and civilisation. Very important and destructive battles 
were fought at Ems and at Vienna 900 A.D., in Thuringia 907 A.D., 
in Franconia 909 A.D., and at Merseburg, 934 A.D., by Henry the 
Fowler. In 955 A.D. Otho I. defeated them with great slaughter 
at Augsburg, and thus put an end to their invasions of Germany. 
In Italy they burnt Pavia, and thence entered Provence and pillaged 
Nimes and Toulouse, 924 A.D., but after the loss at Augsburg they 
ceased to trouble Germany, Italy, and France. (3) The Saracens 
were chiefly hurtful in the south of Europe (the southern and eastern 
shores of the Mediterranean being in the possession of their friends 

1 A. H. Johnson's " The Normans," p. 15. 
Q 



226 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

the Khalifs of Bagdad and Egypt), they ravaged the coasts of Italy, 
conquered Sicily, 827-962 A.D., and Crete, plundering the coasts 
of Asia Minor; in southern Gaul they attempted by force to settle 
at Frejus, from which they took possession of the Pass of St. 
Maurienne, exacting payment from travellers, 950 A.D., but could 
not maintain possession beyond forty years. In Italy they attempted 
to form colonies in Campagnia, Puglia, Bari, Tarentum, Mount Gar- 
gano, Beneventum, and Salerno; many of the petty independent 
dukes and nobles leagued with them, among these the Bishop- 
Duke of Naples, took part in their devastations and destruction of 
towns and churches. Rome itself, under Pope John VIII., paid 
tribute to them, 878 A.D. Rome was saved by the courage and 
activity of Pope Leo IV., 847-855 A.D., and by the defeat of their 
forces, 916 A. D., by Pope John X. on the banks of the Garigliano. 
From Spain they troubled southern France and the Balearic Isles. 
One good effect of the ravages of the Normans, Hungarians, and 
Saracens was, that they led to the fortification of the cities of 
Germany and Italy by the citizens, and the raising of city militias 
for self-defence, from which self-government in due time followed. 

V. The three kingdoms offshoots oj the Carlovingian Empire. 

6. In the ninth and tenth centuries western Europe began to take 
the shape which its political organisations have preserved to our day. 
Eastern Europe also, though less clearly, foreshadowed the particular 
races which since then have formed powerful nations. From this 
period the history of the European world is that of the beginnings 
and the progress of the nationalities existing in our day. Three king- 
doms, which arose out of the division of the empire of Charlemagne, 
naturally claim the first place in the narration. 

FRANCE had ten kings of the Carlovingian Dynasty up to the 
beginning of the Capetian line (Hugh Capet), 987 A.D. In this 
transition period, in which the power of the king or suzerain gradu- 
ally diminished, and. before the full consolidation of the power given 
to the great lords by the operation of the feudal system, France 
appeared to be helpless, and without the organisation necessary for 
its defence, the Normans ravaging from north to south. Paris was 
thrice besieged by them, and ransomed by the payment of tribute, . 
while Normandy was yielded to Rollo, 911 A.D., and Aquitania, 
Septimania, and Brittany were virtually independent. Forty great 
barons, under various titles, of whom Hugh, Duke of France and 
Count of Paris, was the most powerful, overshadowed the king, whose 
actual territory was confined to a small district round Laon. There 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Cmsades. 227 

were six lay peerages besides the royal domains, Flanders, Normandy, 
Aquitaine, Toulouse, Burgundy (the duchy), and Champagne. 
HUGH CAPET, son of the Duke of France, was raised to the 
throne 987 A.D. He thus annexed the crown of France to one of 
the most extensive and powerful fiefs, and became the legal head of 
a confederate aristocracy, with the great advantage of being strong 
enough, in his own territories and by his own resources, to govern 
independently. He was the representative of the new nationality of 
France, distinguished from the old Teutonic element, that is to say, 
the " foreign " dominion of the Carlovingians. This was not, how- 
ever, felt at the time, as the Germanised barons were foremost in 
raising Hugh Capet to the throne. But the real France now began. 
Before this it had been a divided country of eastern and western 
nations. " It was indeed a natural crystallisation of the confused 
elements of ruined Gaul, mingled with all that the Teutonic race had 
brought to renew it, but which had also fallen into premature disso- 
lution." 1 The crown derived real power from the fief of Hugh 
Capet. Paris, the capital of Hugh, was a fixed centre, and united 
Neustria and Austrasia. " The mere change of the royal city was 
an event of the highest importance. The rock of Laon could never 
have won the same position as the island city of the Seine. It might 
have remained a royal fortress, it could never have become a national 
capital." 2 And under this dynasty the langue d' ceil became the court 
language, displacing the German dialect of the Carlovingians. In 
the reign of Henry I., 1032-4 A.D., there was a terrible famine, no 
harvest for three years, but that of 1034 A.D. was equal to the pro- 
duce of three years. Softened by this trial and relief, the clergy had 
influence to procure, in 1035 A.D., a proclamation of the " Peace of 
God " against private wars. But this restraint was found too much 
to be endured, and it was altered into " the Truce of God," by which 
private war was much limited. Philip I. began to reign 1060 A.D., 
and was king at the beginning of the Crusades. At this time " the 
demesne royal " of the kings of France consisted of Paris, Melun, 
Etampes, Orleans, and Sens, equal to the modern departments ot 
Seine, Seine and Oise, Seine and Marne, and Loiret. 

GERMANY, -as an independent state, the bulwark of the west and 
of the south of Europe against the northern and eastern barbarians, 
is the creation of Charlemagne. It was his legacy towards the con- 
solidation and preservation of civilisation in Europe. On the death 
of Charles the Fat, 888 A.D., Arnulf, of the Carlovingian family, 

1 Crowe, vol. i. p. 71. 2 Freeman's "Essays," first series, p. 91. 

Q 2 



228 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

became, as king, the ruler of Germany. He defeated the Normans 
with great slaughter near Lyons, and again near Louvain, 891 A.D., 
after which they ceased to trouble Germany. Then followed wars 
against the Slavi, and the Prince of Moravia (Suatopolk), and the 
first contact of Germany with the barbarous Huns (called at that 
time Bulgarians), 894 A.D. After this Arnulf made two expeditions 
into Italy, 894-896 A.D., to assert the imperial authority over Rome. 
A legal fiction supposes that the emperor rules over four kingdoms 
(i) The Franks (Romans and Germans), (2) Lombardy, (3) Bur- 
gundy, (4) the double crown of the Roman Empire at Rome. Louis 
the Child, his son, succeeded 899 A.D. The Moravian kingdom was 
broken up by the Bohemians and Hungarians. These latter ravaged 
Germany, where they met with stout resistance, till, at last, Louis 
agreed to a ten years' truce, and to pay tribute. This last of the 
Carlo vingians died before he had reigned, in 911 A.D. Conrad 
of Franconia was elected emperor by the dukes of the five powerful 
nations, the Franks, the Suabians, Bavarians, Saxons, and Lorrainers. 
He had to contend with some of his great and powerful nobles, and 
with the Slavi and the Hungarians, and died of a wound received 
in battle with the Hungarians, 918 A.D. Henry the Fowler, Duke 
of Saxony, succeeded, and before 921 A.D. had established his 
authority over Suabia, Bavaria, and Lorraine. He resisted the Hun- 
garians, but was obliged for a time to temporise, A.D. 924-926. 
Henry, having taken prisoner Zoldan their king, concluded with 
him a truce of nine years, and agreed to pay a yearly tribute. This 
period of comparative rest from Hungarian inroads was spent in 
consolidating and increasing the defences of the empire (i) by the 
establishment of the Margravates of Misnia, Schleswig, Wenden, and 
Brandenburg, and the restoration of that of Styria (Austria) ; (2) he 
increased the number of the cities, and secured their safety by walls 
and other fortifications ; garrisoned them with the free men, obliging 
a certain portion of these to reside in the cities. The others held 
their farms as near the cities as possible, and, after a while, mainly 
resided in them. These garrison towns were under the command 
of the emperor's officers, independent of the grafs, dukes, and abbots. 
The towns became the head-quarters of the industrial classes, manu- 
facturers, artificers, &c., while the fairs, markets, and public assem- 
blies of the citizens led to the increase of trade and the beginning 
and perfecting of municipal institutions. He also improved the 
military organisation, by enrolling and training the free men in each 
locality into a regular corps of infantry. By this means he carried 
on successful wars with the Slavic tribes, the Obotrites, the Serbians, 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 229 

the Hevelli, and other barbarous tribes, with the Bohemians, and 
was strong enough to refuse tribute to the Hungarians, 933 A.D. 
Two armies of the Hungarians, one near Sonderhausen and another 
at Saal, near Merseburg, were defeated with great slaughter. Next 
year he repulsed the Danes, and obliged King Gorm to abolish the 
annual national sacrifice, in which ninety-nine men were slain on the 
pagan altars. He died 935 A.D. Otho /., the Great > had to repress 
the insurrection of the Slavi and the invasions of the Hungarians, 
and to subdue some of his rebellious nobles. A great victory 
at Merseburg, 955 A.D., over the Hungarians, prevented any further 
attack by these barbarians. The three expeditions into Italy divided 
his attention from the far more important work of consolidating the 
power of the empire over the Slavi, Bohemians, and Hungarians. 
The first expedition took place 951-2 A.D. ; the second 961-5 A.D. ; 
the third 966-972 A.D. He was crowned emperor there 962 A.D., 
and the Romans and the clergy promised to elect no Pope without 
his sanction. To us these Italian transactions appear to be what 
they were, a serious evil to the empire ; but they were in accordance 
with German feeling as the enforcement of a right of the imperial 
prerogative transmitted from Charlemagne to his successor, the 
emperor of " the Holy Roman Empire." The German emperors sup- 
posed themselves to be the true successors of the Roman emperor. 
As such they claimed a precedency, with the peculiar right of 
appointing rulers to the kingly dignity. Christendom was viewed as 
a great republic, the religious head being the Pope, the secular head 
the emperor. The emperor claimed the right of confirming the 
election of the Pope ; and all the popes from Otho to Henry IV. 
were thus confirmed by the emperors. It was also considered highly 
desirable for the emperor to receive the imperial crown at the hands 
of the Pope. Otho was thus the restorer, or rather the second 
founder, of this empire. " Why a revival of the empire should have 
laid hold of the imaginations of the leading minds of the tenth and 
following centuries is an enigma to us. Probably the disorders which 
accompanied the fall of the old empire, and which again followed the 
death of Charlemagne, impressed men with a craving for orderly rule 
by a strong hand, and ruling by a title universally acknowledged. 
The notions of free government administered in parliamentary 
assemblies were cast into the shade by the power of two great ideas, 
which expiring antiquity had bequeathed to the ages that followed 
a world monarchy, and a world religion. As the men of that day 
could not imagine .... a community of saints without its expression 
in a visible Church, so, in matters temporal, they recognised no 



230 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

brotherhood of spirit without the bonds of forms; no universal 
humanity save in the image of a universal state. In this, and in 
much else, the men of the middle ages were the slaves of the letter, 
unable, with all their associations, to rise out of the concrete, and 
prevented by the very grandeur and boldness of their conceptions 
from carrying them out in practice against the enormous obstacles 
that met them. Under Otho I. the Germans became not only a 
united nation, but were at once raised on a pinnacle among European 
peoples as the imperial race, the possessors of Rome and of Roman 
authority." x Otho II. had a short and troubled reign, 973-983 A.D., 
having to repress the Slavi, the Danes, the Greeks of Lower Italy, 
and to defend Lorraine against the French. He died at Rome in 
his twenty-eighth year, 983 A.D. Otho III. (aged three years) suc- 
ceeded under the regency of his mother, Theophania (a Greek 
princess), who had to contend with the rebellious nobles, the Slavi, 
the Poles, the Bohemians, and with France, which desired to conquer 
Lorraine. This able lady died 991 A.D. Otho III. made three 
expeditions into Italy, and in 998 A.D. put down the republic of 
Rome, which had been created by the patrician Crescentius. The 
resistance of Crescentius had been pardoned the preceding year, but 
on this occasion he was publicly beheaded on the battlements of 
Rome, in view of the army and of the people. In 999 A.D. Otho 
placed his tutor Gerbert in the papal chair as Sylvester II. The 
tutor and the emperor were in advance of their age. The former 
had gleaned from Saracen translations from the Greek, as well as 
from Latin literature, and was master of the science of the day. It 
is supposed that they had planned to remove the seat of empire to 
Rome a project which, had he lived, he would not have been able 
to carry out, for the centre of political power had long moved north- 
ward : he died at the early age of twenty-two, 1002 A.D. Henry II. 
(the Holy), Duke of Bavaria, was elected emperor, and had to battle, 
like his predecessors, with rebellious nobles, with the Poles, and 
Bohemians, and the Slavi. He was thrice in Italy, and died 
1024 A.D. "Perhaps, with the single exception of St. Louis IX., 
there was no other prince of the middle ages so uniformly swayed by 
justice." 2 Conrad II. (the Salic) of Franconia was elected emperor 
in a diet in the plains between Mentz and Worms, near Oppenheim, 
which was attended by princes, nobles, and 50,000 people altogether. 
His reign was remarkable for the justice and mercy which he always 

1 Abridged from Bryce, vol. i. pp. 90-145. 
s Dunham's "Germany," vol. i. p. 117. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 231 

kept in view. The kingdom of Aries and Burgundy was united to 
the empire, 1033 A.D. He checked the Poles, the Hungarians, and 
the Lombards, and gave Schleswick to Denmark as a fief. In 1037 A.D. 
he granted to the lower vassals of the empire the hereditary succession 
to their orifices and estates, and so extended the privileges of the 
great nobles, as to make them almost independent of the crown. 
Henry III. succeeded, 1039 A.D., and established the imperial power 
with a high hand. Henry IV., his son, succeeded at the early age 
of six years, 1056 A.D. His reign was distinguished by the disputes 
about the regency, and also by the rebellion of the Saxons, and by 
his long struggle with the claims of the popes in Germany and Italy. 
Two great changes were going on in Germany in this reign : on the 
one hand, the citizens of the towns began to exercise no small amount 
of self-government on the other hand, the free men, the holders of 
allodial estates, free by their position as holding direct from the 
empire, had to resist the attempts of the nobles to reduce them to 
vassalage. The Eastern Frisians, in their seven petty republics, 
resisted these attempts successfully. " Radabat, the founder of 
the Hapsburg line, may be said to have inoculated his race with 
hatred to freedom by the violent reduction of his free peasantry 
to a state of vassalage." Germany was already gradually becoming 
a confused mass of dukes, margraves, princes, bishops, abbots, and 
free cities, nominally acknowledging the empire, but seldom obedient 
to the emperor. 

ITALY. Eight kings of the Carlovingian race were acknowledged 
in Italy from 814 A.D. to the last, Charles the Fat, who was deposed, 
and died 838 A.D. Afterwards ten kings until 962 A.D., when 
Otho I., the Great, claimed Italy as a fief of the empire, 962 A.D. 
At this time the Lombard Duchy of Benevento had lost in territory, 
Capua and Salerno having become independent principalities. The 
Eastern Empire ruled over "the theme of Lombardy," which in- 
cluded Apulia and Calabria, by its Catapans. The Saracens had 
made the conquest of Sicily between 827 A.D. and 962 A.D. They 
had also established themselves in various important positions in 
Italy, and took part in the petty wars of the Duchy of Benevento. 
Naples, Amalfi, and Gaeta, while nominally acknowledging the 
Eastern Empire, were, in fact, self-governed republics, like Venice. 
Fortunately for southern Italy, NORMAN adventurers took possession 
of Apulia and Calabria, and having defeated Pope Leo IX., who 
had bravely led an army against them (1053 A.D.), received from 
Pope Nicholas II. (1059 A.D.) the investiture of these provinces as 
fiefs of the Holy See, together with the city of Naples, and the rest 



232 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades 

of the Greek territory subsequently conquered. This new power 
was the kingdom of NAPLES, increased in 1060-1090 A.D. by the 
conquest of Sicily from the Saracens. ROME, the seat of the 
papacy, had fallen very low. After the death of Pope Nicholas I., in 
867 A.D., the low character of some of the popes and contested 
elections to the papal chair enabled the Counts of Tuscany to- 
exercise an undue influence in the appointment of the popes. Three 
ladies of this family, the two Theodoras and Marozia, regarded as 
courtesans by their enemies, were the real rulers over their nominee 
Popes. Alberic of Spoleto, of this family, assumed the consulship 
and governed Rome as a republic from 931 A.D. to 954 A.D. After 
his death Rome was governed by a prefect and two consuls, and 
tribunes elected annually. By the interference of Otho L, 962-973 
A.D., the popes were relieved from this bondage, and in 999 A.D. 
Otho III. placed the learned Gerbert (Sylvester II.) in the papal 
chair. At this time Otho repudiated two forged charters ascribed 
to Louis the Pious, by which large accessions of territory were 
granted to the popes. These interferences of the Emperors Otho I. 
and the succeeding Otho II. and III., purified the papacy, but it 
was left to HILDEBRAND (Gregory VII.) the monk of Savona, the son 
of a carpenter, who became Pope 1075 A.D., to raise the power ot 
the popedom above all powers, even the imperial. His disputes 
with the emperor, Henry IV., respecting investitures, involved Italy 
and Germany in civil war for many years. Meanwhile the popu- 
lations of the large towns of northern Italy, which had been 
exposed to pillage by the Huns, and those of the cities of the west 
and of the south, who had suffered from the Saracens, enclosed 
and fortified their cities, and enrolled and disciplined their male 
population in self-defence. Herbert, the Archbishop of Milan, was 
foremost in promoting these organisations, in which Milan took the 
lead. Genoa, Pisa, and the cities of the north followed the example 
of Milan. The Duchy of SAVOY, under the Counts of Maurienne : 
the founder, Beroald, died 1027 A.D. Humbert I. succeeded; then 
in 1072 A.D. Humbert II., who obtained from Henry TV. five 
bishoprics, and acquired also the Marches of Susa and Turin, 
1098 A.D. The CROAT kingdom, independent of Italy 970 A.D., was 
governed by its Zupans, who could lead one hundred and fifty 
thousand horse and foot into the field. The people of the 
isles of VENICE, at the mouth of the Po, met and chose their first 
duke, 697 A.D., and in 809 A.D. fixed their capital on the island of 
Rialto. In 997 A.D. they allied with the towns in Istria and 
Dalmatia, and by their help conquered the pirates of Narente and 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades, 233 

Croatia, and from that time the Doge took the title of Duke of 
Venice and Dalmatia. 

VI. Other Contemporary European States. 

(7) Beyond the boundaries of the empire of Charles der Grosse, 
Spain and the British islands, by their position removed from 
the great battle-fields of central Europe, seemed as if they were 
distinct and separate worlds, which came only occasionally in contact 
with their neighbours. 

SPAIN. The Christian kingdom of ASTURIAS and Leon maintained 
its ground and gradually gained more territory from the Moors. 
Navarre, in the Pyrenees, originally occupying part of France, had 
for its chieftain Pampeluna, while at Jaca there was a small republic, 
which became the nucleus of the kingdom of ARRAGON. Sancho, 
King of Navarre, incorporated Castile from the kingdom of Asturias ; 
at his death his dominions were divided into CASTILE, ARRAGON, and 
NAVARRE, 1035 A>D - > Asturias and Leon were united to Castile 1037 
A.D. ; were separated in 1065 A.D., and reunited 1072 A.D. Arragon 
absorbed Navarre 1076 A.D. Thus at the beginning of the Crusades 
there were two Christian kingdoms in Spain; (I)CASTILE; (2) ARRAGON 
(including Navarre and the country of Barcelona). In all these 
kingdoms the nobles and the great cities exercised great influence 
over their respective governments and limited the power of their 
kings. In Mahometan Spain, the khalifat of CORDOVA was, in 1031 
A.D., divided into a number of petty states. Some of these Khalifs 
of Cordova had patronised literature, and we read of libraries con- 
taining six hundred thousand MSS. In 1085 A.D. the Almoravide 
Dynasty was established from Africa, which prolonged the existence 
of the Mahometan power, in spite of the growing strength of the 
Christian kingdoms. PORTUGAL, wrested from the Moors by Henry 
of Burgundy, was held as a fief of Spain, 1085 A.D. 

The BRITISH ISLANDS were for a time a separate world, not closely 
connected with the Continent until the Norman conquest. England 
was nominally united by Egbert, the west Saxon, 827 A.D. The 
invasions of the Danes called forth the military and civil talents of 
ALFRED the Great, 871-901 A.D. Athelstan was the first King of all 
England, 924 A.D. The Danes conquered and ruled over England, 
under Canute and his son, 1017-1042 A.D. The old line was 
retained in the person of Edward the Confessor, but on his death 
WILLIAM, Duke of Normandy, who claims as the heir of Edward,, 
conquered Harold, his opponent, at Senlac (Hastings, 1066 A.D.); 
this was the beginning of a great change in the civil and political 



234 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

condition of England. " It is to the stern discipline of foreign con- 
querors that we owe not merely England's wealth and England's 
freedom, but England herself." 1 None of the great barons in Eng- 
land, though powerful to oppose the king occasionally, had the power 
to make their fiefs independent as in France and Germany. William 
Rufus, the son of the Conqueror, succeeded 1087 A.D., and was 
living when the Crusades commenced. SCOTLAND was united by the 
conquest of the Picts by Kenneth, 842 A.D., but all west Scotland, 
the Orkneys and the western isles were overrun and held by the 
Northmen. IRELAND was divided into petty kingdoms while its 
eastern coasts were partially occupied by the Danes. 

SCANDINAVIAN nations form a class of nationalities separate from 
the rest of Europe, and best known by their piratical ravages over 
western and southern Europe ; their navigators discovered Iceland 
860 A.D.; then Greenland, 982 A.D. ; and Labrador and New 
England, 994 A.D.; thus they were the first discoverers of America, 
five centuries before Columbus. The twelve petty kings of NOR- 
WAY were first subdued by Harold Haarfrager, 875-938 A.D. In 
SWEDEN the nineteen kingdoms were probably united by Olaf, 
the Lapp king, 993-1024 A.D. ; in DENMARK, the ten kingdoms 
by Gorm, 860-936 A.D., whose wife, Thyra, built the Dannewerke 
wall, eight miles long, 45 to 75 feet high (across Jutland). Under 
Canute, for a brief period, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, England, 
and Scotland were united. Christianity was first introduced into 
Jutland so early as 823 A.D., by Ebbo, of Rheims, but was soon lost; 
Anscar, in 830 A.D. and 853 A.D., first entered Sweden as a missionary 
and with some success. The first professedly Christian king of 
Norway was St. Olaf, 1015-1030 A.D. In Sweden, Olaf (the Lapp- 
king), 893-1024; and, in Denmark, Harold Blaabund, 936-985 
A.D., were the first Christian kings, but the bulk of the population 
for several generations remained pagan. Soon after the beginning 
of the eleventh century the piratical inroads of the Northmen 
decreased, and shortly came to an end. In Denmark the Estriden 
line began to reign, 1047 A.D.; from females of this line the 
sovereigns of England are descended. In Sweden, the Stenkil line 
of kings began, 1055 A.D. 

The plains to the east of Germany, after the defeat of the Avars 
by Charlemagne, were gradually settled by the Slavic nations (the 
original occupiers) into distinct states: as BOHEMIA, under Borrevi, 
890 A.D.; HUNGARY, under Arpad, 888 A.D.; POLAND, under Piast, 

1 Green, "History of Europe," vol. i. pp. 124, 125. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 235 

842 A.D. ; and Lithuania. These Sclavonic rulers exercised des- 
potic power over their people ; the greater part of them were serfs, 
the property of their masters ; the public sale of slaves was common; 
cattle were the most valuable property, and in this property they 
usually paid their tribute (when it was paid) to the Emperors of 
Germany. The vast plains, extending from the White Sea on the 
north to the Euxine (Black Sea) on the south, were those in which 
all the barbarian races from Asia had found a temporary resting- 
place. It was the land through which the whole trade of India 
with the north was carried, from the Caspian up the Wolga, and then 
direct to a semi-civilised Sclavonic settlement on Lake Ilmen, 
NOVOGOROD. The president and people of this trading republic, 
exposed to the ravages of the Northmen, invited a Varangarian 
(Northmen) tribe to take the government of their city. The name of 
RUSSIANS was given to these Scandinavian adventurers, because they 
thus identified themselves with certain Slavic tribes to which this name 
had been applied from time immemorial. RURIC is the first of these 
rulers, and the founder of the Russian nationality, 862 A.D. His 
successors, Oleg and Igor, conquered the Khazars, and in 900-901 
A.D. attacked Constantinople in large fleets, sailing down the Dnieper 
to the Black Sea. So early did the instinctive yearning of this 
nation for an outlet towards the south manifest itself. Wladimar 
embraced Christianity (from the Greek Church) and married a Greek 
princess, Olga, 988 A.D. On his death, 1015 A.D., Russia was 
divided among his sons ; and this practice was continued for many 
generations, to the great injury of the empire. At that time the 
Russian dominions extended eastward to the Carpathian Mountains 
and the confines of Hungary and Moravia. Kiev, on the Dwina, 
was the capital ; one of the sons of Wladimar, Jaroslav (Grand 
Duke of Moscow) was a legislator, who founded a public school in 
Novogorod and translated Greek books into Russian ; his daughter 
Anne married Henry I. of France, 1051 A.D. Biarmeland remained 
independent of Russia till the eleventh century. 

VII. The Eastern Empire, the Mahometan States, and India 
and China. 

8. The Eastern Empire (sometimes called the Greek and Byzan- 
tine Empire), through the position of its impregnable capital, Con- 
stantinople, and also by the amount of its internal resources and 
superior fiscal administrations, maintained itself free from bar- 
barian conquest. The iconoclastic controversy had been settled 
by the restoration of image-worship by Theodora, 842 A.D. The 



236 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

wealth of the empire astonished visitors from the West. The 
treasures accumulated by the Emperor Theophilus, 829-842 A.D., 
amounted to five and a quarter millions sterling. In 963 A.D. the 
revenue paid to the emperor was calculated at 20,000 Ib. of gold 
daily, and the middle class, the trading and manufacturing class, was 
able to bear a heavy taxation, impossible to be borne at that time by 
any Western nations. No doubt these traders and manufacturers 
received the gold in exchange for the products of their own industry 
from Western Europe, which, producing little that was exchangeable 
in return, was thus drained of its specie. The army was composed 
of the Varangarian (Norman) guard, and of the native army of 132 
legions, each 1000 to 1500 men, the best of them Slavs, Wallachians, 
Bulgarians, and Albanians. Arms were largely manufactured, and 
were of a superior character. The possession of the secret of the 
composition of an article, " the Greek fire," added greatly to the 
defensive power of Constantinople. The navy consisted of 60 
vessels, each holding 300 men (70 of whom were fighters). Basil 
the Macedonian began a new dynasty, 867 A.D. Freeman calls 
him " the skilful groom, the obsequious courtier, the reforming 
emperor, in whom we behold a versatility worthy of Alcibiades him- 
self." a Basil II. conquered the Bulgarians, 1019 A. D., and exter- 
minated the Sclavonians in Greece. The accession of Isaac Comnenus, 
in 1057 A.D., was a change for the worse in the whole system of 
government. SERVIA threw off its dependence on the empire under 
its Zupa, Stephen Boistlaf, 1043 A.D. The Asiatic provinces of the 
empire in Asia Minor were conquered by the Seljuk Turks, who 
established themselves at Iconium, 1073 A.D. ; and what was left of 
Southern Italy and Sicily was formed into an independent kingdom 
by the Normans. 

The MAHOMETAN KHALIFAT of Bagdad had begun its downward 
progress. The establishment of independent kingdoms, nominally 
acknowledging the Khalif of Bagdad, proclaimed the weakness of 
the central power. The Taherites established a dynasty in Kho- 
rassan, 820 A.D. ; the Suffarees succeeded them, 872 A.D. ; then the 
Samanians, 902 A.D.; the Buyid, or Delamites, in South Persia, 
913 A.D.; the Hamadans in Syria; the Okatids in North Syria; while 
the Karamatians, a warlike sect of reformers, desolated Arabia and 
Syria, and plundered Mecca, 903 A.D. At Bagdad, the Emir Al 
Omra, the prime minister, 945 A.D., exercised the whole power of 
the khalif, and governed in his name The Toolonite Dynasty took 

1 Freeman, "Essays," third series, p. 236. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 237 

Egypt and Syria from the khalif in 868 A.D. All these Asiatic 
dynasties were subjected by the SELJUK Turks, a barbarous but 
numerous and warlike race from the vast plains to the north of 
Khorassan, the khalif being left in nominal rule of Bagdad, 1037 A.D. 
The first ruler of these Seljuks was Togul Bey. Under his successors, 
Alp Arslan and Malek Shah, they took possession of the whole 
khalifat : but, on the death of Malek Shah, 1092 A.D., the Seljuk 
empire was divided into (i) the sultany of Iconium (Roum), (2) 
Kerman, (3) Iran, (4) Khorassan, (5) North Syria and part of 
Mesopotamia, under the Arab Attabeks, who had partially supplanted 
the Okatids. Meanwhile the new sultany of GHIZNI was founded by 
a slave of the ruler of Khorassan, 961 A.D. Mahmoud of Ghizni 
made twelve expeditions into India, 1001-1024 A.D. ; conquered 
Kashmere, 1014 A.D., and Lahore, 1022 A.D. 

INDIA. The Ghizni Sultan established a dynasty at Lahore, in 
India, 10011024 A.D. 

CHINA was troubled by the inroads of the barbarians. In 763- 
780 A.D., Tai-tsung was obliged to give a Chinese princess as wife to 
the Khan of the Onigours in order to obtain help against the invaders. 
The Emperor Woo-tsung endeavoured to put down all the monas- 
teries and ecclesiastical establishments of Christians, Buddhists, and 
others, but without effect, 841-847 A.D. Buddhism revived under 
Etsung, 860-874 A.D. In 907 A.D., the Tang Dynasty, the Golden 
Age of China, came to an end. Up to 960 A.D. five dynasties passed 
away during a period of great internal disorganisation and invasions 
of the Khitan Tartars, to whom China paid tribute up to the end of 
the eleventh century. 

JAPAN had been, since 603 A.D., divided into eight large depart- 
ments, the heads of which became the real rulers of the land. The 
Shogun (Tykoon), the commander-in-chief, took practically the 
position of sovereign, while the Mikado was the spiritual emperor, 
secluded from all direction of public business. In 794 A.D. Kioto 
became the capital of the Mikado and his court. 

In North Africa, west of Egypt, the Aglabite Dynasty in Tunis 
was superseded by the FATEMITES, 908 A.D. These conquered Fez 
on the west, and then the Toolonite Dynasty in Egypt, 970 A.D. 
became thus lords of all North Africa and Syria. But this extent of 
empire was lessened by the revolt of the Zerides, in Tunis and 
Algiers, 993 A.D., and then by the establishment of the Almoravides 
Dynasty which, in 1052 A.D., founded Morocco, and in 1094 A.D. 
re-established the declining Mahometan kingdom in Spain. The 
ruthless barbarism of the Seljuks and of the Fatemites in Syria, 



238 From the Empire of Charlemagne to tJte Crusades. 

so different from the more friendly rule of the khalifs, was felt by the 
numerous pilgrims from Christian Europe in their visits to Jerusalem 
and the holy places. Their complaints called forth the zeal and the 
preaching of Peter the Hermit, and eventually led to the Crusades 
for the recovery of the Holy Land. 

9. THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of this period is very important, but 
the limits of this history oblige us to use great brevity, and make the 
narrative a mere index of the matters referred to. Three controversies 
relating to theology were carried on in 'the Churches : (i) The 
worship of images. The iconoclastic* Byzantine emperor, Leo III., 
718 A.D., had put down the superstitious adoration paid to images 
and pictures, but the mass of ignorance and superstition existing 
among the clergy and the populace rendered the efforts of the 
government inoperative. Irene restored the images, 792 A.D.; and 
they were fully established in 842 A.D. Charlemagne, in the 
West, and the Council of Frankfort were opposed to their super- 
stitious use, and their views were fully expressed in the Carolinian 
books, 790-794 A.D. But the papacy favoured the popular super- 
stition, which became general in the Christian Church, in the use of 
images in the West and of pictures in the East ; (2) the nature of 
the spiritual presence in the bread and wine used in the administra- 
tion of the Lord's Supper. In 831 A.D. Paschasius Radbert taught 
the doctrine of transubstantiation (the fatal term which too strictly 
defined what had hitherto remained indefinite), that the bread and 
wine were actually changed into the body and blood of the human 
body of Christ, and as such were actually partaken of by the com- 
municants, and not merely spiritually discerned. This was for a 
time an open question in the Romish Church. It was opposed by 
John Scotius Erigena on philosophical principles, 850-884 A.D., and 
by Berenger, 1045-1088 A.D., but supported by Lanfranc. In 
993 A.D., Gerbert (afterwards Pope Sylvester) maintained that it was 
best to say simply that the bread and wine are the body and blood 
of Christ, but to be only apprehended by faith. The rage of the day 
was for a sensible object of worship, and this the wafer (the host) 
supplied; (3) the doctrine of predestination, taken from St. Augus- 
tine, was revived by Gottschalk, 848 A.D., was opposed by Hincman 
and others, 845-882 A.D., but exercised no small influence over the 
leading minds of the day. It seemed to simplify a difficult problem 
by cutting the knot. The notions of & purgatory after death, a period 
of terminable suffering for sin, for which masses, prayer, and alms- 
giving could afford relief, was generally prevalent, and naturally led 
to a reliance upon the offices of the Church, and upon penances and 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 239 

pilgrimages, all of which increased the influence and the wealth of 
the clergy. There were no important heresies in addition to those 
already existing. The Paulicians having raised a rebellion in Asia 
Minor, 100,000 of them were slain in battle, and the sect dispersed 
over Europe, 844-871 A.D., and known as Patarini, Cathari, Albi- 
genses, Brethren of Orleans. They are charged with Gnostic and 
Manichsean errors, and were persecuted and put to death in the tenth 
and eleventh centuries. The increasing superstition of the age was 
opposed by Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, 816-846 A.D.J by Claude, 
Archbishop of Turin, 804-825 A.D. ; who probably were protected in 
their teaching by Carlovingian influence, and by Elfric, an Anglo- 
Saxon, 990-1051 A.D., whose views nearly approached those held by 
the first Protestant reformers. In the ninth and tenth centuries 
Christianity had been nominally established in the Scandinavian 
kingdoms, by Anscar, 830-853 A.D., also in Hungary and in Russia. 
The formal separation of the Greek Church from the Latin Church 
was hastened by the rash excommunication of the Greek Church by 
the Romish legates at Constantinople, 1054 A.D. 1 Monastic insti- 
tutions of a high character and under strict rule were established in 
the tenth and eleventh centuries. Berno founded Clugny, 912 A.D., 
which, in the twelfth century, had 2,000 monasteries in connexion 
with it. Romuald founded Camalduli, in the Apennines, 1012 A.D. 
Gualbert founded Vallombrosa, a society of hermits, 1039-1093 A.D. 
Bruno founded the Grand Chartreuse, for the order of the Carthusians, 
1084-1086. Robertof Molesme founded, at Citeaux, the Cistercians, 
1092 A.D. Such a number of institutions of this character excite the 
wonder of this age. There must have existed in the middle ages a 
more than ordinary number of persons whose tastes were opposed to 
the clerical and civil and military professions as then exercised, and to 
whom no other employments were open. To such, the society of their 
equals, which these monasteries offered, and the consolation afforded 
by religious duties and literary studies, made these institutions desir- 
able retreats, while to the lower classes the position of a monk was 
superior to that of the agricultural serf. The influence of the Bishop 
of Rome (the Pope] was much increased during this period. The 
Church of Rome having received from the Carlovingian kings large 
territorial possessions and secular power, the popes were placed in a 
position to enforce the submission of the episcopate in all western 
Europe; and the exaction of submission from the bishops was 
facilitated by the publication of certain documents, called the " 1st- 

1 Mosheim, " Century XI. ;" Milman, " Latin Christianity," book vi. chap. 3. 



240 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

dorian Decretals? said to have been discovered in Spain, 836 A.D. 
These consisted of a series of letters up to 385 A.D., which made 
plain to the readers that from the very first the Bishops of Rome 
exercised jurisdiction over all bishops as the rightful successors of 
St Peter. Metropolitans and bishops, though supreme in their 
respective jurisdictions, were yet subject to the decisions of the Pope. 
These barefaced forgeries were received as genuine by Pope Nicho- 
las I., 858-867 A.D., of whom Greenwood remarks, "Now the true 
path of the papacy, however overgrown with weeds and briars of a 
century's growth, lay clearly revealed before the vigorous intellect of 
the reigning pontiff; and he once more felt himself at liberty to deal 
with the powers of the world as the spiritual monarch, ' the true lord 
and king,' as he stood entitled upon the pseudo-apostolic charter 
{the Decretals) so lately lodged in the sacred archives of his Church. 
With the Decretals, genuine or fictitious, of his sainted predecessors 
for his cue, the world's confusion for his friend and ally, the example 
of his renowned precursors for his stimulus, and his clear under- 
standing and resolute will for his guide, Nicholas plunged into the 
labyrinth of mundane affairs without hesitation or misgiving." x Dean 
Milman remarks, " The immediate, if somewhat cautious, adoption 
of the fiction, unquestionably not the forgery, by Pope Nicholas, 
appears to me less capable of charitable palliation than the original 
invention .... It is impossible to suppose that Nicholas himself 
believed their validity, on account of their acknowledged absence 
from the Rome archives .... It is impossible to deny that, at 
least by citing without reserve or hesitation, the Roman pontiffs gave 
their deliberate sanction to this great historic fraud." 2 After the 
death of Nicholas, the authority of the papacy in the city of Rome 
was so far reduced by the low character of some of the popes, and 
by double elections, and by the bondage in which it was held by 
the family of the Dukes of Tuscany, and by certain ladies of high 
rank and corrupt morals (Theodora and her daughters Theodora 
and Marozia), that it was near extinction. To repeat the crimes and 
excesses committed by the popes and by their opponents would be 
tedious and disgusting. Sergius III., a paramour of Theodora, 
occupied the chair, 904-911 A.D. John X., 914-928, A.D., a lover of 
Theodora, but a man of ability and courage, defeated the Saracens 
at the Gragliano ; he was murdered by Marozia, 928 A.D. John XI., 
the son of Pope Sergius III. and Marozia, reigned from 931 to 
936 A.D. Alberic, a son of Marozia, ruled the Church by appointing 

1 Vol. iii. p. 243. Milman's " Latin Christianity," book v. chap. 6. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 241 

four popes in succession. On his death, 953 A.D., his son Octavius, 
a youth of eighteen, took possession of the popedom as John XII., 
955 A.D. These gross irregularities were reformed by the interference 
of the Emperors of Germany, Otho L, II., and III., 963-998 A.D. 
John XII. was deposed 963 A.D. In opposition to the imperial 
power, Crescentius, the grandson of John X. and of Theodora, 
governed Rome, and revived the old titles of consul, tribune, and 
prefect. Otho III. caused Crescentius to be executed, and made 
the learned Gilbert pope, as Sylvester II., 999 A.D. After Otho's 
death, 1002 A.D., Crescentius, the son of the preceding Crescentius, 
was the ruler of Rome as patrician, but his power was supplanted by 
the Counts of Tusculum, who, by great bribery, appointed a series of 
popes, from Benedict VIII. to XII. ; after him, John XIX., then 
Benedict IX., a licentious youth (whom one of his successors, Vic- 
tor III., describes as foul and execrable); then Gregory VI., with 
whom two other popes claimed the popedom. The Emperor 
Henry III., in 1046 A.D., appointed the Bishop of Bamberg 
Clement II., and thus set aside the line of Tusculan popes, the 
Germans declaring " that in the whole Church there was scarcely 
one who was not disqualified, either as illiterate, or as tainted with 
simony, or as living in notorious concubinage." 1 Leo IX., the friend 
of Peter Damiani, was appointed 1053 A.D. He was defeated and 
taken prisoner by the Normans, 1054 A.D., with whom Nicholas II., 
in 1059 A.D., made a profitable settlement. This Pope caused the 
election of the future popes to be in the suffrages of the cardinals, 
that is to say, the bishops presiding over the parishes of the city of 
Rome. These were the cardinal deacons in charge of the hospitals. 
Afterwards the title was given to the seven bishops of Ostia, Porto, 
Santa Rufino, Sabina, Palestrino, and Frascati. Nicholas II. left, 
however, the right of the clergy and people of Rome to appeal to the 
emperor, and to the emperor the right of confirmation. Both these 
privileges soon fell into disuse. In 1059 A.D. the Normans accepted 
Naples as a fief of the Holy See, and became the most useful 
auxiliaries of the Pope. On the election of the monk Hilde- 
brand as Gregory VII., 1073 A.D. (who had been the real ruler 
of the preceding popes from Leo IX.), the papacy was invigorated. 
He endeavoured with great energy to place the popedom in a posi- 
tion superior to all earthly rulers, and to subordinate the clergy under 
the sole jurisdiction of the Pope, free from the interference of the 
civil power. In 1075 A.D. he abolished the right of investiture to 

1 Milman, " Latin Christianity," book vi. chapter i. 
R 



242 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

spiritual offices by any temporal sovereign, at the same time 
carrying out large reforms among the clergy themselves. Hence 
arose the contest with the Emperor Henry IV. and his successor 
respecting investitures, ending for a while in the affected sub- 
mission of Henry IV., at Canossa, 1077 A.D., which, on the part of 
the emperor, was a mere expedient arising out of present necessities. 
A reaction followed. A general feeling began to express itself in 
favour of " the plain principles of right and equity .... If the 
clergy would persist in holding large temporalities, they must hold 
them liable to the obligations and subordinate to the authority 
of the state." 1 By the death of the Countess Matilda the papacy 
received large additions to its wealth. Amid all Gregory's struggles 
against the emperor and refractory clergy, he nourished the hope of 
leading a crusade against the Mahometans in Palestine. Christianity 
was first introduced into Scandinavia by Anscar, 830-853 A.D. 

LEARNING AND EDUCATION were not neglected in this period. 
Charlemagne, a warm friend and patron of learned men, promoted 
the establishment of schools in cathedrals and monasteries. There 
appears to have been a fair number of educated men who could 
read, speak, and write Latin, and were acquainted with the curriculum 
at the schools ; they were " the conservators and propagators of the 
old traditional learning, the Augustinian theology, the Boethian 
science, the grammar, the dry logic and meagre rhetoric, the Church 
music, the astronomy mostly confined to the calculations of Easter, 
of the trivium and quadrivium .... The revival of letters under 
Charlemagne was, however, as insulated, as premature, and as 
transitory as the unity of his empire." 2 A large number of writers 
are found reported in the historians of this period both in the Greek 
and in the Latin Churches, but they are chiefly theological or mere 
chroniclers. In the Greek Church we may mention Photius, historian 
and theologian 850-886 A.D. ; Suidas, the lexicographer, 900 A.D. ; 
Theophylact, the historian, 1077 A.D. In the Latin Church, John 
Scotus Erigena, the philosopher, 850-884 A.D. ; Egenhard, historian, 
840 A.D. ; Rabanus Maurus, politician and theologist, 800-856 A.D. ; 
Asser, biographer of Alfred, 890 A.D. ; Sylvester II., the learned 
Pope; Dunstan, the theologian and monkish reformer, 990-1003 A.D. ; 
Peter Damien, cardinal, whose letters are full of information, 
1040-1072 A.D. ; LANFRANC (1040-1080 A.D.) and ANSELM 
(1063-1109 A.D.), both of them great theologians and Archbishops 
of Canterbury; Fulbert, theologian, 1001-1028 A.D. ; Ingulphus, 

1 Milman, "Latin Christianity," vol. iii. p. 283. 2 Ibid., vol. iii. p. 104. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 243 

theologian and historian^ 1051-1100 A.D. ; the names of Hincmar 
(809-832 A.D.) and Berenger (1050-1088 A.D.) have already been 
noticed in connexion with the controversies of their day. The great 
physician of the Arabs, Avicenna (Ibn-Sina), of Bokhara and Bagdad, 
lived 996-1037 A.D., but his voluminous works contain treatises on 
metaphysics and morals. Two great names in this list are connected 
with the philosophy of this and the period following, John Scotus 
Erigena and Anselm. In the year 827 A.D., the Emperor Michael 
sent from Constantinople to Louis the Pious a work ascribed to 
Dionysius the Areopagite ; which John Scotus Erigena translated. It 
was evidently the work of an Alexandrian monk, in which the 
pantheistic doctrine of emanation the evolution of the universe 
through successive orders of existence, beginning with the primordial 
essence called God, and the general teaching of the Neo-Platonists 
are all reproduced without any material alterations. This work led 
John Scotus Erigena to compose his work " De Divisione Naturae," 
a strange attempt to reconcile Christianity with Neo-Platonism. His 
whole theological teaching is a system pantheistic in its basis with a 
Biblical terminology ; he threw off Augustinianism and defended 
free-will. In this work Erigena laid also the foundation for the long- 
contested dispute of the schoolmen on Nominalism and Realism. 
He taught the realistic doctrine that universals exist before and in 
the individual object. Alfred, king of England, cultivated literature, 
^71-901 A.D., and translated Orosius's " History of the World," 
Bede's " Ecclesiastical History," and Boetius on " Consolation." 
Anselm, in his " Cur Deus Homo," discusses the doctrine of the 
Atonement. Sir J. Stephens 1 has some interesting remarks on 
Anselm : " The boundless realm of thought over which, in the 
solitude of his library, he enjoyed a princely but unenvied dominance 
were, in his eyes, of incomparably a higher value than either his 
Primacy over the Church of England or his triumph in maintaining 
the prerogatives of the Church of Rome. In our days, indeed, his 
speculations are forgotten, and the very subjects of them have fallen 
into disesteem " [this was true when Sir J. Stephens wrote, but is far 
from being the case now] ; " yet, except, perhaps, the writings of 
Erigena, those of Anselm on the 'Will of God,' on 'Truth,' on 
*Free Will,' and on the 'Divine Presence,' are not only in point of 
time the earliest examples, but in the order of invention the earliest 
models of those scholastic works which exhibit in such intimate and 
curious union the prostration and the aspirings of the mind of man, 

1 " Biog. Essays," I2mo. p. 245. 
R 2 



244 From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 

prostrating itself to the most absurd of human dogmas, aspiring to 
penetrate the loftiest and most obscure of the divine attributes." 

It is probable that from the ninth to the eleventh century 
inclusive there were found a few laymen who could read and write, 
there was no doubt an increase in learning, but mainly among the 
clergy. The Benedictines, from their monastery at Clugny, 910 A.D., 
and the Carthusians, 1098 A.D., did much to advance the education 
of clerics. Latin was still spoken as vernacular among the better 
class in Italy so late as 924 A.D., but had long before ceased to be 
vernacular in Spain and Gaul. Already in France the difference 
between the dialects of the north and south had become apparent. 
We hear of superior schools at Paris, Toulon, Bologna, Paderborn, 
Oxford, and Cambridge, and a medical school at Salerno-. In the 
East, the khalifat of Al Mamon, 813-833 A.D.,. is regarded as the 
Augustan age of Arabian literature ; and in Mahometan Spain, in 
the tenth and eleventh centuries, there were universities in the 
capitals of each province and a college in each district, and in the 
whole territory seventy libraries. In some of the schools of learning 
the mathematics and philosophy of the Greeks were taught, and 
some scholars from France and Italy profited^ from their teaching ; 
Pope Gerbert (Sylvester), for instance. The tenth century was not 
a literary one in Italy and England, but it was one of progress in 
France and Germany. The whole period was one of remarkable 
absence of ability, and, with some exceptions, the literature was one 
of mere compilation, destitute of originality. " Truth requires us to 
say that the Saracens or Arabs, particularly of Spain, were the 
principal source and fountain of whatever knowledge of medicine, 
philosophy, astronomy, and mathematics there was in Europe from 
the tenth century." * 

NAVIGATION AND DISCOVERY. Already the Scandinavians were 
making extensive voyages. Wolfstene from Jutland visited Esthonia 
on the east of the Baltic. Other, from Heligoland, sailed northward, 
doubled Cape North, and advanced as far as Biarmia at the mouth 
of the Dwina. They both of them describe thier voyages to King 
Alfred, who made use of them in his Anglo-Saxon translation of 
Orosius. 

1 Mosheim (Soames), vol. ii. p. 276. 



From the Empire of Charlemagne to the Crusades. 245 



State of the World, 1096 A.D 



EUROPE. 

SCANDINAVIA. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, sometimes tempo- 
rarily united, but generally separate. From Norway and 
Denmark the piratical invasions of Western Europe 
originated. Sweden was engaged in subduing the Lapps and 
the Finns. 

BRITISH ISLANDS. England had come under Norman rule, 1066 
A.D., by the conquest of William, Duke of Normandy. 
Scotland, by the union of the Scots and Picts under Kenneth, 
843 A.D., became one kingdom. Ireland, nominally divided 
into four kingdoms, with numerous smaller chieftainships ; 
Danish settlements on the eastern coasts, principally at Water- 
ford and Wexford, and on the west at Limerick. 

THE VAST PLAINS TO THE EAST OF THE BALTIC AND GERMANY 

now began to approach a more settled political condition. 
Russia, under the successors of Ruric, became the great 
power of the north-east of Europe ; the division of the empire 
in 10 1 6 A.D. was followed by wars between the several dukes, 
by which the power of the empire was greatly diminished. 
Biarmeland, to which the Finnish tribes retreated before the 
Swedes and Russians, was subject to Russia in the eleventh 
century. There had been for some time regular intercourse 
between Scandinavia and the Eastern Empire, through 
Russia, by which the northerns were benefited. Poland 
partly consolidated under its first Duke Piast, 842 A.D. ; 
Boleslaus II. was the first king, 1077 A.D. Bohemia had its 
first Christian duke, 890 A.D., and was raised to the dignity 
of a kingdom, 1806 A.D., under Wratislaus. Moravia was 
Incorporated with Bohemia, 1029 A.D. Hungary \ after the 
expulsion of the Avas, settled by Arpad, chief of the Magyars ; 
Duke Geysa received Christianity, 972-997 A.D. ; Stephen I., 
the first Christian king, 1000 A.D. The Lithuanians, Prussians, 
and the Vendes (Sclavonic tribes) are spread south of the 
Baltic from the Elbe to the Gulf of Finland ; these Sclavs 
were constantly at war with their neighbours, fomsburg, on 



246 State of the World y 1096 A.D. 

the island of Wollin, at the mouth of the Oder, founded by 
the piratical Scandinavians, 850-960 A.D., was next to Novo- 
gorod, in Russia, the principal seat of trade, and also the 
stronghold of the pirates. 

GERMAN EMPIRE, including the Netherlands, Lorraine, Burgundy, 
and Aries, with Switzerland, thus occupied not only 
modern Germany, but Holland, Belgium, Switzerland, and 
the east of France down to the Mediterranean. Its emperor 
was the generally acknowledged suzerain of the Baltic states 
(Poland, Hungary, and Bohemia) and of Italy, and claimed 
a priority of rank over all the European powers. 

FRANCE, under the Capetian kings, step by step advancing towards 
the union of all its provinces under one king. 

SPAIN. The two Christian kingdoms of Castile and Arragon in 
the north ; the African Moravides ruling over the Mahom- 
etans in the south. Portugal, a new kingdom, a fief of 
Castile, conquered from the Moors, 1085 A.D. 

ITALY. All northern and central Italy nominally part of the 
Holy Roman (German) Empire, but governed by dukes, 
counts, and other nobles, the large cities, independent 
municipalities, acknowledging the empire. Rome was mainly 
governed by the Pope, who had to contend with the local 
republican feeling of the people and nobles. The Duchy of 
Savoy in the north-west, under the Counts of Maurienne, the 
first of whom died, 1027 A.D. Venice, a republic, affected 
to belong to the Eastern Empire, while Naples, Bari, and 
Amalfi had to submit to the Norman kings of Naples and 
Sicily, by whom the Greeks of the Eastern Empire had been 
expelled, 1080 A.D. Most of the large cities in Lombardy 
became independent republics during the contests between 
the popes and the emperors. Croatia, under its zupan, 
970 A.D. Dalmatia independent, 1052 A.D. ; but both 
Croatia and Dalmatia were conquered by Hungary in the 
twelfth century. Servia was an [independent state, under its 
zupans, 1043 A - D - 

THE EASTERN GREEK EMPIRE included a large portion of the 
present Turkey in Europe, south of the Danube. Servia 
had become an independent state, 1043 A.D. 

The barbarous tribes to the south of Russia were the Patzinaciten 
beyond the Danube and along the north coast of the Black 



State of the World, 1096 A.D. 247 

Sea ; beyond these, the Khazars and the Kumani extended 
to the Caspian Sea, always at war with the Russians and the 
Eastern Empire. 

ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR; the western portion to the Eastern Empire. The 
centre and the west occupied by the Seljukian sultanie of 
Iconium. 

SYRIA under the rule of the Fatemite khalifs of Egypt. 

IRAN (Persia), KERMAN, and KHORASSAN are Seljukian sultanies. 
The khalifs of Bagdad, the successors of Mahomet, confined 
to that city, which was under the control of the sultans of 
Iran. 

GHIZNI, under its sultans, who occupy Afghanistan, Cashmere, 
and Lahore in India. 

CHINA troubled by Tartar invasions. 

JAPAN under the Mikado, whose power was gradually absorbed 
by the Shogung (Tyakun). 

ARABIA under the nominal rule of the khalifs of Bagdad, but in 
reality left to its own tribes and petty states. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT. The Toolonite dynasty, established 868 A.D., followed 
by the Fatemite dynasty, which ruled over Fez, 908 A.D., and 
over the Aglabites of Tunis, 941 A.D. 

TUNIS and ALGIERS governed by the Zerides under the Fatemites. 

FEZ and MOROCCO under the Almoravides, whose chief was called 
Emir-al-Mulmein, from 1069 A,D. 



EIGHTH PERIOD, 

From the Cmsades, 1096 A.D., to the Reign 
of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 



i. FIVE great events of general importance fall within this period : 
(i) The Crusades ; (2) the contest between the popes and the emperors 
respecting Investitures, which led to the independence of the Italian 
Republics ; (3) the rise of an order of Burgesses and Citizens and the 
formation of municipalities in Europe; (4) the predominant influence 
of the papacy in Europe ; (5) the irruption of the Mogul Tartars into 
Southern and Western Asia and Eastern Europe ; (6) the leading 
nations and people in this period. 

(i) The Crusades were military expeditions from Christian Europe 
sent to deliver the Holy Land (Palestine) from the power of the 
Mahometan SELJUK Turks, who had destroyed the temporal power 
of the khalifs of Bagdad and had subjugated the various sub- 
ordinate kingdoms nominally subject to his rule. Under the 
khalifs the pilgrims from Christian countries had been protected and 
even respected as persons under a religious impulse, and as useful 
purchasers of local products ; but the rough and fanatical Seljuk 
Turks, recent converts .to Mahometanism, treated the pilgrims with 
barbarity and contempt. PETER the Hermit, an eyewitness and 
sufferer, by his indefatigable exertions roused all Europe to listen 
to his complaints, and to recognise the necessity of redress. The 
propriety of an armed interference on the part of the Christian 
nations had been for some time discussed by a few of the leading 
minds of the age; first, byGerbert (afterwards Pope Sylvester) 999 A.D., 
and by others influenced by the prevailing notion that the end of the 
world would take place in the year 1000 A.D. ; but it was the 



From the Crusades to Rudolph of Hapsburg. 249 

intensity and vehemence of the genuine feeling of Peter which 
roused the active spirits of the age to take immediate action. At 
the council held at Clermont, 1095 A.D., over which the Pope, 
Urban II., presided, the enthusiasm of a large concourse of all 
ranks and ages could not be restrained. The war-cry, " It is the 
will of God," was adopted by those who took the mark of the 
cross as their distinctive badge, and from which they received 
the name of Crusaders. These expeditions, nine in number, 
lasted nearly two hundred years ; but, besides the regular expedi- 
tions, there were numerous companies, and even individual Crusaders, 
and parties of children, perfectly ignorant of the necessary precau- 
tions and preparations for such a warfare, and consequently exposed 
to all the evils arising from destitution, fatigue, and disease, and 
unable to resist the weakest body of the enemy, by whom they were 
either slaughtered or reduced to slavery. The general enthusiasm 
which pervaded all ranks has been derided, and the Crusades con- 
demned by the materialistic philosophical historians of the eighteenth 
century ; but their character and utility have been vindicated by the 
more liberal and enlarged views of modern writers. The remarks of 
Maurice are to the point : " The struggle of Christendom and the 
Saracens had been the struggle of the middle ages .... the best 
and holiest of men, the recluses who lived only for the unseen 
world, like Bernard of Clairvaux righteous kings who cared for the 
well-being of their subjects and would not willingly spill their blood 
like St. Louis, yet felt that wars for the sepulchre were the bonds of 
Christian faith and fellowship, the securities against the indifference 
which would cause all moral energies to rust. That day was passed." * 
As a matter of fact, Mahometanism, professedly and without any 
equivocation, purposed to propagate its creed by the sword. This 
declaration, carried out with zealous valour by its followers, rendered 
Christianity (as then understood) warlike in self-defence. " The 
Church must become militant in its popular and secular sense ; it 
must protect itself by other arms than those of patient endurance 
. . . . resigned and submissive martyrdom." 2 Briefly we give a 
sketch of each expedition. The first Crusade was begun by Peter 
the Hermit and Walter the Penniless, who led a host of undis- 
ciplined men through Hungary and by way of Constantinople into 
Asia Minor, which was at once destroyed by the Sultan of Iconium. 
Godfrey of Boulogne, with his brothers Baldwin and Eustace, Hugh 



1 " Mediaeval Philosophy," chap. v. p. 113. 

2 Milman's "Latin Christianity," vol. ii. p. 221. 



250 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

of Vermondois (brother of Philip I. of France), Robert of Nor- 
mandy (brother of William Rufus of England), Robert of Flanders, 
Stephen of Chartres, Aymer, Bishop of Puy, Raymond of Thou- 
louse, Bohemund (the Norman) son of Robert Guiscard and Prince of 
Tarentum, Tancred (the cousin of Bohemund and son of the Marquis 
Odo), the celebrated perfect knight in Tasso, were the leaders of the 
main body. Godfrey led his party through Hungary to Constanti- 
nople, where he was joined by Hugh and his party, who had come 
through Italy, and by Raymond, who had come through Lombardy 
and Dalmatia. They were annoyed by the equivocal conduct of 
Alexis, the Eastern Emperor, who was alarmed at the number of the 
Crusaders. He had hoped to see a moderately numerous army, 
sufficient to aid the Eastern Empire by the recovery of Asia Minor 
from the Seljuk Turks, but the arrival of host upon host alarmed him. 
It seemed to him that " Europe, uptorn from its roots, had precipi- 
tated itself upon Asia." After a while his fears were quieted, or he 
deemed it prudent to conceal them. Nice was taken by the 
Crusaders and left in the hands of Alexis, 1097 A.D. Antioch was 
captured 1098 A.D., and Jerusalem 1099 A.D., of which Godfrey was 
made king. Edessa was made a separate dominion for Baldwin, and 
Antioch for Bohemund. The Second Crusade was provoked by the 
fall of Edessa, conquered by the Seljuk princes of Aleppo, 1145 
A.D. Of this Crusade ST. BERNARD was the main supporter by his 
eloquence, but Louis VII., of France, and Conrad III., of Germany, 
1147-9 A - D -> failed to retake Edessa or to make themselves masters 
of Damascus. The Third Crusade, 1189-1193, was taken to 
recover Jerusalem, which had been captured by Saladin, the ruler 
of Egypt and Syria, 1187 A.D. Fulk, of Neuilly, was a worthy 
successor of Peter the Hermit and of St. Bernard in his advocacy 
of the Crusades, 1189-1202 A.D. Its leaders were Frederick I, 
(Barbarossa), of Germany, now in his seventieth year; Philip 
Augustus, King of France; Richard Cceur de Lion, King of England. 
Barbarossa first entered Asia Minor, took Iconium, but was 
drowned in the river Calycadnos, in Cilicia. His army had been 
impeded by Isaac (Emperor of the East), whom he had to compel 
to aid him to pass the Hellespont ; after this, this Emperor of the East 
was the ally of the Seljuk Turks against the Crusaders. Frederick, 
Duke of Swabia, led the German army to Acre, and instituted the 
order of the Teutonic knights, and died of the plague, 1191 A.D., 
while besieging Acre. Soon after, the city surrendered to the kings 
of France and of England. Here the King of England quarrelled 
with Leopold, Duke of Austria, and with Philip of France. Philip 



Reign of Riidolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 251 

abandoned the Crusade. Richard, after relieving the siege of Jaffa 7 
concluded an armistice with Saladin, by which the whole line of 
coast from Jaffa to Acre remained in the hands of the Christians, 
free access to Jerusalem and the Holy Places being also secured ta 
them. The island of Cyprus, which Richard had conquered, was 
sold by him to Guy, the titular King of Jerusalem. Richard, on 
his return to England, was seized by the Austrian duke and kept 
a prisoner by Henry VI. of Germany for two years, until ransomed. 
The Fourth Crusade, 1197 A.D., consisted of bands sent out by the 
EmperorHenry VI., which, reaching Syria by Constantinople, regained 
possession of Sidon, Tyre, and Beyrout ; but the emperor himself 
died in Sicily. The Fifth Crusade, 1202-4, under the patronage of 
Pope Innocent III., was undertaken by the preachers of Fulk of 
Neuilly, by the Franks and Venetians headed by Theobald of 
Champagne, Louis Simon Montford, Walter of Brienne, Geoffry 
of Villehardouin, Baldwin of Flanders, Hugh of St. Pol, and 
others from France and Italy. They sailed from Venice, and, being 
unable to pay in money the cost of the hire of the ships, agreed 
to besiege and take Zara, in Dalmatla, for the Venetians, 1202- 
A.D., on their way to Constantinople. Here they remained to 
restore Isaac Anglus, who had been deposed by his brother Alexis. 
On the death of Isaac, his son, Alexis, could not fulfil the promise 
made to them; the Crusaders took possession of Constantinople, 
and placed Baldwin, Count of Flanders, on the throne with one- 
fourth of the empire, as feudal suzerain over the rest. The 
VENETIANS obtained the shores of the Adriatic, ^Egean, and Black 
Seas, with most of the Greek islands. The French and Lombard 
nobles, one of whom, the Marquis of Mountserrat, received the 
whole of Macedonia, &c., which has been named the kingdom of 
Thessalonica. A Greek empire was established at Nicea by 
Theodore Lascaris, and another at Trebizond. The Sixth Crusade 
was undertaken by Andrew II., of Hungary, 1216 A.D., and by 
Frederick II., grandson of Barbarossa, 1227-8 A.D., and ended 
with the cession of all Jerusalem (except the temple), with 
Jaffa, Bethlehem, and Nazareth, to the Christians by the Sultan of 
Egypt. The Seventh Crusade, by Richard, Earl of Cornwall, and 
some French nobles (opposed by the Pope and the emperor), 
1236-40 A.D., obtained from the Sultan of Egypt most favourable 
terms. After this the Karismians, who had been driven from 
Khorassan by the Moguls, took Jerusalem, but were driven out by 
the Sultan of Egypt. This led to the Eighth Crusade, in which St. 
Louis IX., King of France, took Damietta, but was defeated and 



252 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to tJu 

made a prisoner at Mansourah, and released on ransom, 1250 A.D.; 
he lingered awhile at Acre and returned to France, 1254 A. D. The 
Ninth Crusade. St. Louis IX. besieged Tunis, where he died, 1270 
A.D. Prince Edward, of England (afterwards Edward I.) 1271 A.D., 
took Nazareth and returned to England 1272 A.D. The loss of 
Acre, 1291 A.D., put a stop to the Crusades. Attempts were made 
by Gregory X. to induce the Emperor Rudolph to join another 
Crusade, but in vain, 1274 A.D. The KNIGHTS TEMPLARS, defeated at 
Acre, being deserted by Henry II., King of Cyprus, titular King of 
Jerusalem, left Acre, being only seven in number. Thus Palestine 
was lost, as Thermopylae was lost, to save Greece. All the outlay 
of wealth and blood, freely shed for two centuries, had been 
apparently wasted ; but the conquest of Palestine and the repeated 
expeditions and valorous fights to hold it, though not finally success- 
ful, were the protection of Europe from the attempt of a Mahometan 
Seljuk conquest. Unknown to themselves, the Crusaders anticipated 
and prevented an invasion of Europe by the Seljuk hordes, backed 
by the fanaticism of Mahometan Asia, and thus prolonged the 
existence of that feeble bulwark (but yet a bulwark) of Christendom, 
the Eastern Empire, for a period of three hundred and fifty years. 
The Crusaders were in this respect the worthy successors on a 
larger scale of the Roman ^Etius, of Charles Martel, and of Charle- 
magne, and the early Emperors of Germany, who successfully 
repelled and threw back the invasion of the Huns, the Saracens, the 
Saxons, the Slavs, and the Hungarian barbarians. They saved 
Western and Central Europe from the repetition of the ravages and 
misery consequent upon a barbaric invasion, such as had over- 
whelmed the old empire of Rome. Our gain by the Crusades is 
obvious, when we contrast the intelligence, the civilisation, the 
liberty, the security, and the progress of the Europe of our day with 
the ignorance, the barbarity, the despotism, the insecurity, and the 
stagnation everywhere observable in that " geographical expression," 
the Turkish Empire. The Crusades were not national enterprises ; 
kings and emperors joined in them, not as representatives of their 
people, but simply as soldiers of the cross. The movement was an 
impulse felt by all the European population of all ranks, not even 
excluding the serf or the slave. It was, no doubt, greatly helped 
by the notion which prevailed in the preceding century, that the end 
of the world was approaching. It had no definite political object 
beyond that openly avowed. Prudent statesmen, whose views were 
limited by mere local interests, discouraged what they deemed a 
mania. The Crusade was the practical reply of the religious feeling 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 253 

and the self-respect of Christian Europe to the hated paynim who 
had desecrated its sacred localities and maltreated its pilgrims. 
These wars were for an idea, a mere unpractical idea, as it then 
appeared. To us, in the retrospect, we recognise a method and an 
end in the enthusiastic action of the Crusaders, in the breakwater 
which rolled back the flood which otherwise might have overwhelmed 
the Christianity and civilisation of Europe. Beyond this great work 
there were great incidental benefits arising out of these expeditions. 
They prepared the way for the gradual extinction of the feudal 
system, which, however necessary for the security and perpetuity of 
the barbarian conquerors and rulers of Europe, had become an 
obstacle to further progress, when its work had been accomplished 
in the occupation of the land by a warlike homogeneous population. 
The great nobles parted with their lands to defray the costs of their 
expeditions, and thus fiefs, which had as independent sovereignties 
checked the rule of law, were absorbed by the feudal suzerain, 
the king, whose policy it was to enforce the law and to favour the 
emancipation of the masses from the control of their lords. The 
cities, stimulated by the increased expenditure required for the 
military outfits, had full employment for an increasing industrial 
population. This was especially the case in Italy. Continued 
intercourse with the East stimulated the enterprise of the com- 
mercial cities of Southern Europe, as Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Florence, 
Milan, Marseilles, and opened out new markets for commerce. 
Agriculture was benefited by the breaking up of large properties 
and the increase of small farms. A yeomanry class began to take 
the place of the serf, and the foundation of a middle class, the 
balance and stability of modern states, was laid. The higher classes 
imbibed something of that high regard for honour and the peculiar 
reverence for the sex, whence all chivalry. But it was, perhaps, 
in the diversion of the current of the evils which afflicted mediaeval 
society that we may trace the most important of the incidental 
benefits accruing to the world from the Crusades. A host of wild, 
untamed, and untamable spirits eagerly accepted the prospect of 
warlike activity with the prospect of plunder. The terms held out 
by the Church, a general pardon of sins, had, no doubt, great in- 
fluence with all classes. The indigent, the wretched, the slave and 
the serf had the prospect of change and a hope of improvement. 
The stream flowed on, and with it passed away an immense load of 
potential evil and^ mischief to society. Among the two million of 
Europeans said to have perished in these Crusades, a large number 
consisted either of the dangerous and unsettled class, or of the 



254 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

ambitious and adventurous class, whose presence at home would 
have helped to perpetuate and increase the predominant evils of 
mediaeval society. In confirmation of these views, we may quote 
from one of our latest historical critics : " The Crusades contributed 
directly and indirectly, in many ways, to generate and diffuse the 
feeling of a common Christendom, and even of a common 
humanity. They united in a common sentiment Norman, Saxon, 
and Kelt, Frenchman and Austrian, Norwegian and Italian. They 
were the first events of universal European significance which 
rested on a European public opinion. They softened in some 
measure the antipathies of the races and people which gathered 
themselves together to combat for a common cause. They made 
the Baron feel more dependent upon his vassals, and raised the serf 
in his own estimation and in that of others. They strengthened 
the power of the crown .... they widened the range of men's 
ideas, tastes, and desires ; they gave an impulse to science and art, 
and a still greater impulse to commerce j and thus, although they 
had their origin in fanaticism and were accompanied with unspeak- 
able horrors and followed by numerous and most serious evils which 
do not require to be mentioned, they also undoubtedly helped in no 
slight degree to emancipate the human mind and educate the 
human heart." 1 Antiquarians trace the origin of surnames and the 
use of armorial bearings, and all the mysteries of heraldry to the 
period of the Crusades ; but there were no coats of armour before the 
twelfth century ; the first fleurs de Us on the crown and robe of the 
French kings appeared in the reign of Louis VII., 1164 A.D. 
Another fact is connected with the Crusades the appearance of 
leprosy in Europe. Tournaments, and the institution of religious- 
military orders also date from this period. 

2. (2) The contest between the papacy and the empire respecting 
investitures had for its ultimate object, on the part of the papacy, the 
establishment of the popedom as a visible divinity, endowed with 
the whole power and majesty of Christ upon earth, kings, princes, 
constitutions, and peoples being reduced to the condition of tract- 
able instruments in the hand of God's visible representative resident 
at Rome. On the part of the empire, the object was to subject the 
Church (except in matters purely spiritual), and Church property, 
and the persons of the clergy to the secular power. Hildebrand 
(Gregory VII.) proclaimed that kingdoms were held as fiefs under 
St. Peter. The emperor, on the other hand, desired (as Charle- 

1 Flint's " Philosophy of History," vol. i. p. 59- 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 255 

magne hoped and intended) to become the master of the popes, 
and thus to wield both the secular and the clerical power. Both 
extremes were evils, from which, perhaps, this contest helped to 
deliver European society. There were great abuses allowed, and, 
perhaps, favoured by the secular power, which the Pope did well 
to resist. Simony in the purchase of bishops' and other ecclesi- 
astical benefices had for long been common and notorious. Attempts 
were being made in Germany to render clerical livings, from the 
highest to the lowest, hereditary in the children of the clergy, 
and to maintain the occupancy of certain bishoprics in particular 
families, the celibacy enjoined by the Church being for the most 
part evaded or defied. Why should not ecclesiastical fiefs as 
bishoprics and abbeys be hereditary as well as the temporal fiefs ? 
This tendency was of nearly two hundred years' standing, and was 
increasing as it suited the interests of an influential class beyond 
the control of the secular power. Here the papacy rightfully 
opposed the hereditary transmission of ecclesiastical power and 
position, and thus saved Europe from a separate caste of the priest- 
hood by the exaction of clerical celibacy (in itself productive of 
great evils), checking at the same time the authority exercised by 
the emperor over the Church. The all-absorbing question of the 
relations of Church and State, implied in the question of investitures, 
related to the temporalities of the see which the sovereign was sup- 
posed to bestow upon the bishops. By this institution the sovereign 
exercised a control over the bishops and an overwhelming influence 
in their appointment. On the death of a bishop his ring and staff 
were seized, and without these there could be no legal consecration. 
Besides the desire to benefit the Church by freeing the nomination 
of bishops from imperial control, the popes had reasons of a lower 
character in their opposition to investiture by the crown, they 
themselves profited by annexing to the Holy See the revenues of 
bishoprics and abbeys, and by exactions from the dignified clergy 
from time to time. Hildebrand (Pope Gregory VII.) was, no doubt, 
above mere temporal considerations ; and, had he confined himself 
to the removal of simoniacal contracts, and the introduction of 
unsuitable characters into the higher offices of the Church by regu- 
lations in which he would be supported in enforcing by the moral 
feeling of Europe, he would have accomplished a great work. But, 
beyond the suppression of the intolerable abuses which had too 
long been tolerated, he aimed at the complete subjection of the 
Church in all its orders and degrees, as well as the empire, to the 
see of Rome. "It was a magnificent idea, but how was it recon- 



256 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

cilable with the genuine sublimity of Christianity, that an order of 
men that one single man had thrust himself without authority 
.... between man and God had arrayed himself, in fact, in 
secondary divinity? .... This monarchical autocracy was un- 
deniably taught and maintained, and by none more than Hildebrand, 
through means utterly at variance with the essence of Christianity 
.... by bloody and desolating wars, by civil wars, with all their 
horrors, by every kind of human misery. Allow the utmost privilege 
of the age of a warlike and ferocious age .... yet this demand 
of indulgence for the spirit of the times is surely destructive of the 
claim to be immutable Christianity; the awful incongruity between 
the Churchman and the Christian, between the representative of the 
Prince of Peace and the Prince of Peace himself, is fatal to the 
whole." 1 In this attempt Hildebrand provoked the opposition of a 
large portion of the clergy (especially by his enforcement of clerical 
celibacy), in addition to that of the emperor and nobility. Had the 
Emperor Henry IV. been a man commanding respect by the purity 
of his life and the wisdom of his government, the Pope would have 
been worsted in the contest. Even as it was, with every advantage 
of character on the side of Gregory, and with all the power and 
prestige of the popedom, the point in dispute was, after a contest 
of fifty years, settled by a compromise, by the treaty or concordat 
at Worms 1122 A.D., Calixtus II. being Pope, when both Henry IV. 
and Hildebrand had been long removed from the conflict. The right 
of investiture by the ring and the pastoral staff was conceded to the 
Pope, the spiritual authority coming from him. It was then settled 
that bishops should be elected by the capitulary bodies, but ap- 
pointed by the emperors by the touch of the sceptre to the pos- 
session of their temporal rights and privileges ; but what was implied 
by a free election, with other important points, were left undecided. 
This compact was ratified by the Lateran Council 1128 A.D. The 
conflict had exhausted the energies of all parties. It has continued 
more or less to this day, and must continue while Romish religious 
establishments are supported by the secular power. In France and 
England the conflict was soon re-opened. The wars and distraction 
arising out of this contest have not been without some profitable 
results in the education of Europe. "The dispute between the 
emperor and the popes was the axis on which for more than two 
centuries European history revolved. It was productive of many 
evils to Germany and Italy, but productive also of great blessings to 

1 Dean Milman's " Latin Christianity," book vii. ch iii. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 257 

Europe in general. * If it had been possible,' says Gervinus, 1 ' for 
the emperor and the papacy to have united peaceably ; if that which 
had occurred in the Byzantine kingdom of the East could also have 
occurred in the Teutonic Roman kingdom of the West, and could 
the combined secular and spiritual powers have rested on one head, 
the idea of unity would have gained the preponderance over that of 
national developments, and in the centre of this quarter of the 
world, in Germany or Italy, a monarchical power and single form of 
government would have been constructed, which would have thrown 
the utmost difficulties in the way of the national and human pro- 
gression of the whole of Europe.' Fortunately, a union of the 
two powers did not take place. The one saved Europe from entire 
slavery to the other. This long struggle favoured the rise and 
growth of independent thought, and, by preventing the realising of a 
one-sided and external unity, furthered the cause of a full and free 
unity." 2 In this war of Investitures the prelates, nobles, and cities 
of Italy obeyed some the emperor some the Pope, not from a blind 
fear but from choice, according as the political or the religious senti- 
ment prevailed. The war was general, but everywhere waged with 
the local forces. These contests increased the power and political 
importance of the municipalities ', in Italy especially. Every city 
armed its militia, which, headed by the magistrates, attacked the 
neighbouring nobles or towns of a contrary party. While each city 
imagined it was fighting either for the Pope or the emperor, it was 
habitually impelled exclusively by its own sentiments ; every town 
considered itself, as a whole, as an independent state, which had its 
own allies and enemies ; each citizen felt an ardent patriotism for 
his own city ; each had its bell for calling the citizens to the par- 
liament assembled in the great square ; each city had two consuls 
annually elected. Between the years 800 and 1200 A.D., the most 
prodigious works had been undertaken and accomplished by the towns 
of Italy, as ports, quays, canals, public palaces, and temples, which 
are to this day objects of admiration. The Lombard cities, Milan, 
Pavia, Verona, Padua, Mantua, &c., leagued to preserve their 
liberty, and, after a long struggle, from 1155-1183 A.D., the cities 
obtained practical independence. This was one result of the contest 
between the Pope and the emperors. 

3. (3) The rise of an order of Burgesses and Citizens, and the 
formation of Municipalities through Europe generally, with various 
degrees of liberty and self-government. The old Roman munici- 

1 Gervinus, "Course of History since Napoleon I.," I2mo., 1853. 

2 Flint's "Philosophy of History in Europe," vol. i. p. 58. 

S 



258 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

palities, though for a while thrown into the shade by the barbarian 
rulers of the west, gradually recovered their organisation, exercised 
gradually their privileges, and engaged in industries which led to 
the accumulation of population and wealth. In FRANCE, Marseilles, 
Avignon, Aries, Narbonne, Toulouse, Perigueux, Bourges, and others 
enjoyed a measure of self-rule. "All that was elevated in the 
Gallo-Roman populations .... was found in the cities j the only 
constant residents in the country were the half-servile coloni and 
the agricultural slaves. On the contrary, the superior class of the 
German population established itself in the country, where each 
family, independent and proprietary, was maintained on its own 
domain by the labour of its own German Lidi whom it had brought 
thither, or by the old Keltic coloni. In the tenth century Gaul had 
become France, and the serfs were settled in families paying feudal 
duties. The cities influenced the rural districts in the twelfth or 
thirteenth centuries either by example or by the contagion of ideas." J 
Louis VI. encouraged the establishment of corporate towns, and 
assisted them in their resistance to their lords, 1135 A.D. Louis VI I. 
pursued a similar policy. St. Louis IX. published a code of laws. 
Louis X. (Hutin) gave the franchise to the villeins on the royal 
domains, and Philip called the representatives of the cities to seats 
in the States-General, 1318 A. D. The first patents of nobility were 
granted by Philip le Hardi, 1273 A.D. In ITALY, Genoa, Pisa, 
Amalfi, and Venice, Florence, Sienna, and others were practically 
free cities at an early period as well as the great Lombard cities. 
The invasions of the Huns, Saracens, and Hungarians in the pre- 
ceding centuries, 900-1200 A.D., had compelled the cities of Italy 
and Germany to surround themselves with walls and other fortifica- 
tions. After the death of the Emperor Henry IV., 1106 A.D., the 
German cities were generally self-governed and independent, and 
the formation of the Hanseatic League in the eleventh century raised 
up a new power, which, in the thirteenth century, was upheld by 
seventy cities, of which Lubeck was the head. The Franconian 
emperors enfranchised the cities 1024-1125 A.D., and freed the 
villeins in the thirteenth century. In ENGLAND the cities grew up 
after the Norman conquest. Magna Charta, extorted by the barons 
from John, recognised the liberties of London and the cities, 1215 
A.D. In 1265 A - D -> after the barons' war, Simon de Montfort (1265 
A.D.), and after him Edward I. (1295 A.D.), called the cities to return 
members to the Parliament. Serfdom was gradually abolished in the 

1 Aug. Thierry, "History of the Tiers Etat," vol. i. 






Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D, 259 

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. In SPAIN the wars between the 
Christian kings and the Mahometans led to the acquisition of peculiar 
powers by the cities, which in 1118 A.D. sent deputies to the Cortes. 
(4) The predominant influence of the Papacy in Europe. "The 
position of the popes at this moment was most lofty and dignified : 

the clergy were completely in their hands By the introduction 

of celibacy they transformed the whole body of secular clergy into 

a sort of monastic order The popes desired to be the only 

bishops of the Church. They interfered without hesitation in the 
administration of every diocese." With this Henry IV. charged 
Gregory VII. : "Thou hast trampled under foot, as if thy servants, 
the governors of the holy Church namely, the archbishops and 
bishops " ; admitting, however, that in this the Pope had public 
opinion on his side. " As early as the beginning of the twelfth 
century Prior Gerohus ventured to say, ' It will come to pass that the 
golden pillars of the monarchy will be utterly shattered, and every 
great empire will be divided into tetrarchies. Not till then will the 
Church be free and unfettered under the protecting care of the great 
crowned priest.' .... Almost the only comprehensive, centralising 
power was that possessed by the Pope. The mingled spiritual and 
temporal character which life had assumed during that period, the 
entire course of events inevitably tended to produce such a power, 
and to render him the depositary of it." The events thus referred 
to were the conquests of the Christian kingdoms in Spain over the 
Mahometans, the success of the Teutonic knights in Prussia, the 
taking of Constantinople, and the establishment of a hated power 
in the East, the Crusades, the humiliation of John of England, his 
accepting his kingdom as a fief from the Pope, &c. &c. The burning 
of Arnold of Brescia (who had long resisted papal authority) at 
Rome by order of the Emperor Frederick I., 1155 A.D., was another 
instance of deference to papal claims. Arnold was orthodox, 
ascetic, and unimpeachable in his private character. He appealed 
to the Gospel against the wealth of the clergy; the whole feudal 
imperial system as well as the pontifical was to be set aside j the 
sovereign power, endowed with all the wealth of the clergy and laity, 
was to be a popular assembly. These were the dreams of in- 
experience, pardonable in the twelfth century, but which are now 
and then indulged in by philosophical politicians who believe that 
nothing is impossible. In this instance, manifesting the contempt 
of the feudal emperor for mere burgesses, and the contempt of a 
German for Italians, there was obviously a political mistake. But 
it would have been well worth the while of the Teutonic emperors 

s 2 



260 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

to have made the Romans their allies, and " bridled by their help 
the temporal ambition of the Pope. The offer was actually made 
by them, first to Conrad III., 1138-1162 A.D., and afterwards to 
Frederick I., who repelled in the most contumelious fashion the 
envoys of the senate." 1 This mistake of the emperors, in throwing 
away the attachment of the Italian cities, threw all the influence 
of Lombardy and the cities into the hands of the popes. In- 
nocent III., whose reign is the culminating period of the pontifical 
power, 1198-1216 A.D., was only thirty-seven years old when elected 
to the papal chair. The scope and intent of the scheme of the 
papacy, as matured in his mind, was opened out in his consecration 
sermon. The Pope is declared to be the viceroy of God, " the suc- 
cessor of St. Peter, he that standeth in the midst between God and 
man ; somewhat lower than God, but above man ; less than God, 
but greater than man." 2 Although these claims have no foundation 
in Scripture and reason, yet one cannot but admire the supremacy 
claimed for mind and religion over brute force. Incidentally, the 
papal usurpation was in these ages overruled for good. It checked 
greater evils. The practice of INNOCENT III. was in full accordance 
with his claims, as in the case of John of England, Baldwin of 
Flanders, Philip Augustus of France. It is remarkable that this 
Pope never recognised the utility of the great Mendicant orders by 
which the papal power was strengthened for two centuries. The 
papal power pressed hardly on the sects opposed to the Church of 
Rome. The Albigenses in the south of France, a sect holding 
sundry Gnostic Oriental notions, and opposed especially to the power 
and wealth of the clergy, although protected by Raymond, Count 
of Toulouse, were persecuted by the Inquisition 1198 A.D., and 
were ruthlessly put down by a crusade against them by the popes, 
1208-1228 A.D. So extensive was the heresy in Languedoc that 
Levaur, the Inquisitor bishop and papal legate, assured the Pope 
that the purification of that province was not to be expected " until 
the city of Toulouse was razed to the ground and the citizens put 
to the sword." 3 The Council of Toulouse enforced a decree of 
the fourth .Lateran Council (1215 A.D.) directing the appointment of 
sworn men in different parts of the diocese to discover heretics. 
This is the formal beginning of the Inquisition (1229 A.D.) under the 
pontificate of Pope Gregory IX. It had tribunals at Toulouse and 
other places, with power to extort confession by torture. This Pope 
died 1241 A.D., aged one hundred years. Equal diligence in the 

1 Bryce, pp. 277, 278. 2 Greenwood, vol. v. p. 369. 3 Ibid., vol. v. p. 549. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 261 

work of destroying all opposition to the teaching of the Church was 
shown in other parts of France. At Rheims, in 1239 A.D., about 
one hundred and eighty-three Manicheans were burnt in the presence 
of one archbishop, seventeen bishops, and one hundred thousand 
people. In Germany the first Inquisitor, a Dominican, detested for 
his cruelty, was slain by some nobles, 1233 A.D. Meanwhile the 
MENDICANT orders, Dominican and Franciscan, by degrees, through 
their labours and genuine regard for practical piety (at that period 
of their history), brought back the affection of the people to the 
Church. These Albigenses, whose principles were really dangerous 
to social order and morality, are not to be confounded with the 
Waldenses, called also the Vaudois, a very different party, only re- 
sembling the Albigenses in their opposition to the Roman hierarchy. 
These WALDENSES originated in a society founded by Peter Waldo, 
at Lyons, 1170 A.D., which spread over the south of France, North 
Italy, and part of Germany. They professed to take the Bible as 
their rule, and were opposed to the doctrinal errors and practices of 
the Romish Church. An effort was made to bring them, under the 
name of " poor Catholics," under the control of the Church a proof 
of the impression made by them on the public mind ; but this effort 
failed. The military orders of knighthood were firm supporters of 
the papal authority. Of these the Hospitallers of St. John removed 
to Malta 1301 A.D. ; the Teutonic order settled first at Marieden, 
then at Venice, and finally in North Germany. The Knights 
Templar, founded 1120 A.D., became rich enough to provoke the 
cupidity of Philip IV. of France, by whom, with the support of the 
Pope, they were plundered and murdered, 1307-1314 A.D. The 
nfluence of the papacy was much lessened by the shock given to 
the higher feelings of Christian men by the merciless persecution of 
the Hohenstaufen family in Italy by the popes. The French prince, 
Charles of Anjou (brother of St. Louis), invited by the Pope, as the 
opponent of the Hohenstaufens in Naples and Sicily, having de- 
feated and taken prisoner Conraddin, the last of that family, a youth 
of fifteen, had him publicly beheaded at Naples, 1268 A.D. The 
first successful rebellion against the papal power was directed by 
Philip le Bel early in the fourteenth century. 

4. (5) The Irruptions of the Mogul Tartars under Ghengis Khan 
into Southern and Western Asia and Eastern Europe. 4. These 
Moguls or Tartars (called by the Chinese, Tatsis or the Das), 
a pastoral people, resembling the Huns and Avars of the fifth 
and sixth centuries, were united, after a war of forty years, by 
GHENGIS KHAN, 1206 A. D. A general assembly was held on a wide 



262 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

plain in Mongolia, near the stupendous range of the Altai, which was 
attended by the Mogul nobles and warriors, many of them the 
chiefs of tributary hordes. Seated on a high throne formed of 
bucklers and shields covered with the skins of foxes and wolves, 
Temudschin presided over the meeting, which had been convened 
for the election of the provincial governors and the promulgation of 
a new code of laws. The appearance of an old hermit, who stated 
that he had seen in a vision the God of heaven, and had heard him 
give the empire of the world to Temudschin, and had proclaimed 
him king of kings, moved the assembly to proclaim Temudschin, by 
the title of Ghengis Khan, as sole ruler, on the principle that, as there 
was only one sun in heaven, there should be only one king on earth. 
In the opinion of this " scourge of God," the greatest pleasure of 
man was "to conquer his enemies, to take from them all they 
possess, to see the persons dear to their enemies bathed in tears, to 
mount their horses and carry away captive their daughters and their 
wives." 1 The Monguls, in their original state, practised polygamy, 
respected nothing but strength and bravery, took no interest in any- 
thing in nature except the growth of the grass, the names given to 
their months being descriptive of the different aspects of the prairie ; 
their food, the flesh and milk of animals, and their clothing from the 
skins of the animals used for food. They were horsemen from their 
infancy, and had no infantry in war hence their rapid movements. 
A Chinese contemporary describes their mode of warfare : " When 
they wish to take a town, they fall on the suburban villages. Each 
leader seizes ten men, and every one of these is forced to carry a 
certain quantity of wood, stones, and rubbish, which they use for 
the filling up of ditches or the formation of trenches. In the 
capture of a town the loss of ten thousand was not regarded. No 
place could resist them. After a siege, all the population was 
massacred, without distinction of old or young, rich or poor, 
beautiful or ugly, those who resisted or those who yielded." Ghengis 
Khan first conquered China, Korea, Tibet, India, Turkestan, 
Bokhara, and all the petty kingdoms in eastern Asia between the 
Tigris and the Indus, which had originated in the division of the 
Seljuk empire ; his capital horde was at Karakorum. He died on his 
way to complete the conquest of China, 1227 A.D. While engaged 
in the conquest of Bokhara, the Mogul hordes came in contact with 
THE RUSSIANS, then divided into several distinct kingdoms. The 
Polovtsi, their nomad enemies, claimed the help of the Russian 

1 " History of Tartary," &c. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 263 

princes, and, in spite of the appeal of the Mogul ambassadors, this 
was granted. The Russians and Polovtsi were beaten at the Kalka, 
a small river flowing into the Sea of Azoph. Six princes and seventy 
of the chief boyards were left dead on the field ; hardly a tenth of 
the army escaped. The Kievians alone left ten thousand dead. 
The Grand Prince of Kief capitulated, but his guard were massacred, 
and he and his two sons-in-law were stifled under planks, the Tartars 
holding a festival over the inanimate bodies, 1224 A.D. In 1237 A.D. , 
Bati invaded central Russia, conquering in his way the Bulgars, 
then the princes of Riazan, nearly all of whom fell in battle ; then 
the Grand Principality with Moscow, 1238 A.D., and so on for 
several years. Bati had an army of 500,000 Turks and Slavs, 
besides 160,000 Moguls : the tortures they inflicted are too horrible 
to relate. In many parts of Russia they left only one man in fifty 
of the population. In the province of Kief 60,000 men, besides 
women and children, were destroyed, 1240 A.D. The horrors of this 
invasion all the towns burnt, prisoners massacred, princes as well 
as people, churches and places of refuge burnt with all their inmates ; 
on one occasion a young prince, a child, was " drowned in blood," 
to revenge the resistance of his people. Hundreds of thousands 
were carried captive ; ladies of rank, once adorned with rich garnets 
and jewels of gold, reduced to slavery, turning the wheel of the mill 
and preparing the coarse food of their masters. The cause of this 
great calamity to Russia was the division among the princes ; the 
armed population was confined to the princes and the citizens ; the 
peasantry, the bulk of the population, were unarmed, while the Moguls 
were all soldiers, and Bati had with him 500,000, all cavalry. In 
addition, the Moguls carried with them "figures of dragons which 
spat fire and vomited an intolerable smoke." POLAND was next 
invaded. Miceslaw, the Duke of Upper Silesia, with the Polish 
Duke of Bolesland, and multitudes of men, women, and children 
fled before them. Breslau was burnt. Henry the Pious, with his 
handful of Germans and a few Hospitallers and Poles (30,000), 
resisted the Moguls (150,000) at Leignitz for two days. Henry was 
killed. The Moguls filled nine sacks with the ears of the Christians ; 
but, notwithstanding the victory they had gained, they had learned 
to shun " the land of the ironclad men," and, after vainly besieging 
Leignitz and Goldberg, they turned southwards. Meanwhile, the 
German princes and bishops had assembled at Merseburg, and had 
resolved upon a general summons to the field. In Saxony, men, 
women, old men, and children, had taken up the sign of the cross, 
The Pope had summoned Christendom to arms. Frederick II., the 



264 From the Cmsades, 1096 A.D., to the 

emperor, wrote to the sovereigns of the west, " This is the moment 
to open the eyes of body and soul, now that the brave princes on 
whom we reckoned are dead or in slavery." These barbarians, 
bearing the head of Henry the Pious and others, crowded the 
mountains up to Moravia, and besieged Olmutz, which was despe- 
rately and successfully defended by the Bohemians and Moravians. 
Besides the fortified cities and the ironclad men, the Moguls feared to 
fight in a broken, hilly country, so they ravaged Hungary for three 
years on both sides of the Danube, hunting up the fugitives hid 
in the woods from their hiding-places, and then murdering them. 
All the towns were burnt. Three hundred women of the highest 
nobility, who had escaped the general massacre, were executed in 
the presence of the Tartar chief. 1 Their retreat homeward was 
hastened by the news of the death of Oktai, the second emperor of 
the Moguls in China. Bati established " the Golden Horde " as 
the Khan of Kipshack, from the Caspian to the mouth of the 
Danube, absorbing the ancient Patzineks and Polovtsi, and exacting 
tribute from the Russian princes. The last of the khalifs of Bagdad 
was put to death by Huluku, 1258 A.D., being trod to death by the 
horses of the Moguls. This was the last of the Abassides in Bagdad, 
but the office was perpetuated for three centuries longer in the house 
of Abbas in Egypt. Bagdad was plundered for forty days, and 
200,000 people massacred, 1260 A.D. In attempting to conquer 
Syria, though they took Aleppo and Damascus and entered Palestine, 
they were defeated by the Mameluke Sultan of Egypt, and their 
power, crushed in due time, ceased to exist as a terror to Europe or 
southern Asia. In consequence of the terror excited in Europe by 
the advance of the Moguls, the price of herrings was reduced to a 
nominal amount, as the vessels of Gothia and Frizia were not sent 
to purchase the usual supplies from the English fisheries. Singular 
that barbarians from the frontiers of China, the extreme East, 
should influence, by the terror of their name, the markets of the 
extreme West. By the Mogul invasion, and continued control 
maintained over Russia by the Moguls, the semi-barbarous power 
of Russia was kept from exercising any action upon its western 
neighbours for about two centuries and a half, until 1481 A.D. Had 
the power of Russia been concentrated under one ruler while its 
neighbours were comparatively weak and divided, the balance of 
power in the East of Europe might have been disturbed, and the 
territory of Russia might have been extended not only over Poland, 

1 See " Letter of the Emperor " in Greenwood. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 265 

but over Hungary and western Germany, to the great injury of 
European freedom and civilisation. 

(6) The leading Nations during this Period. Scandinavian 
nations : Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, which in this period 
were brought into a somewhat nearer connexion with Europe. 

Nonvay. Magnus II. succeeded Harold Hardrada, 1066 A.D., 
and was followed by Magnus III., whose successor, 1069 A.D., was 
Olaf III., the Pacific, who did much to promote civilisation in Nor- 
way. He made Bergen a commercial emporium, founded several 
guilds or fraternities of the traders and artisans, and introduced glass 
windows and chimneys. And besides this he promoted and pressed 
the liberty of the serfs, directing that in every district (fylke) one 
bondsman was to be set free annually. Magnus ill. (the Barefoot) 
invaded the Isle of Man, and was killed in Ireland, 1103 A.D. 
Sigurd, before he became king, had carried out a remarkable ex- 
pedition into the Mediterranean, 1107-1 in A.D. He sailed with 
sixty ships and a large number of followers, wintered in England, 
where he was entertained by Henry I., reached Spain in the sum- 
mer, destroyed sundry fleets of Saracen pirates, and took and 
plundered Cintra, Lisbon, and Alcazer (Saracen cities), visited the 
Normans in Sicily (under Count Roger), then to Jerusalem and the 
Jordan as a pilgrim, and afterwards assisted at the siege of Sidon by 
the King of Jerusalem. Returning by way of Constantinople, 
ii 1 1 A.D., he was kindly received by Alexis Comnenus, and passed 
through Bulgaria and Hungary to Suabia, where he was entertained 
by the Emperor Lothaire, and so through Denmark to Norway. He 
reigned from 1122 to 1130 A.D. A period of civil dissensions fol- 
lowed for nearly a century. The first Storthing was held 1223 A.D., 
composed of the bishops, and barons, and the great landholders. 
Iceland and Greenland were annexed 1261, 1262 A. D. Hako IV. 
(1251-1262 A.D.) made himself respected and feared. He was 
defeated at Largs by Alexander III. of Scotland, 1261 A.D., and 
died in the Orkneys, 1262 A.D. Magnus VI., son of Hako IV., 
ceded the Hebrides (but not the Orkneys) to Scotland, 1263-6 A.D. 
The allodial proprietors about this time became vassals, and the old 
jarls took the titles of dukes, barons, &c., but the people were free 
and armed. Magnus was called Lagabeter (law-mender), 1263 A - D -; 
he died 1280 A.D. In 1273 A.D. it was enacted at Bergen that no 
laws should be enacted except by the Storthing. 

5. Sweden. Karl Sverkerson, of the Bonder class, established the 
Sverker line, and reigned 1135-55 A - D - Erick the Saint endeavoured 
to improve the religious condition of the people. He was called " the 



266 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

Lawgiver," on account of his law that " every wife should have equal 
power with her husband over locks, bolts, and bars, and that she 
should enjoy one-third of his substance when a widow ; a compact 
made that Charles Sverkerson should succeed Erick, and their 
children should succeed alternately." The Finns were conquered in 
his reign, 1137 A.D. Charles Swecker, 1161-1167 A.D., united 
Gothland to Sweden, and was the first king of the united Swedes 
and Goths. The last of the Border dynasty was Erick III., who 
died 1250 A.D. Waldemar, a child, son of Birger Jahl, of the 
Folkungar family, under the regent, his father, began the Folkungar 
line. Birger built Stockholm, and destroyed the rival Folkungar 
family. His dominion included Bothnia and Carelia. He fortified 
Wyburg, warred with the Esthonians, more or less, to repel their 
ravages. In 1260 A.D. the diet of nobles and clergy decreed that 
no taxes should be levied without their consent. In 1279 A.D. 
Magnus Ladulas succeeded as king of Gothia and Sweden. 
Female heirship and hereditary nobility were introduced in his reign. 
He caused the seditious race of the Folkungars (his own party) to 
be destroyed, and governed with a strong hand. His surname, 
Ladulas, was very honourable to him. It arose from the law made 
by him to correct the practice of the nobles, &c., claiming free 
quarters. He compelled them to pay for their corn, &c., which 
they and their cattle consumed when travelling. 

Denmark. There was a double election, 1147-1157 A.D., after 
which Waldemar I., the Great, began to reign. In 1169 A.D., he 
took and destroyed Arcona, in the Isle of Rugen, a powerful for- 
tress held by the pirates, and in 1170 A.D. finally destroyed the 
famous stronghold and city of Jomsburg, the piratical capital, 
placed on an island at the mouth of the Oder. It had been 
destroyed before, by Canute, 1019 A.D., and by Magnus, 1044 A.D. 
It never recovered this destruction, but sank into the petty town of 
Wollin. Waldemar also reconstructed the old Dannewarke wall 
across Jutland. He also made large conquests in Mecklenburg and 
Pomerania; founded Dantzig 1165 A.D. Canute VI. conquered 
Pomerania, Holstein, and Gothonia, 1182-1202 A.D.; but these con- 
quests were not permanent. Waldemar II. colonised Esthonia, &c., 
1202-1241 A.D. Feudal institutions were introduced into Denmark 
in the twelfth century, but the cities sent representatives to the par- 
liament under King Abel, 1250-1252 A.D., and the deputies of the 
peasantry, 1280 A.D., in lieu of the personal attendance of 
the armed peasantry. In 1241 A.D. Waldemar II. laid before 
the " Thing " of Jutland, at Viborg, and before the Zealand "Thing," 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 267 

in Wordingborg, the general laws of the whole monarchy, as supple- 
mentary to provincial customs. The provincial diets were superseded 
by a national diet, the " Danehof." A national diet was directed to 
be held annually at Nyborg, in judicial matters each province and 
city to act independently. King Abel was killed by the Frieslanders 
in 1252 A.D. He founded Stralsund and Revel, 1200-1222 A.D., 
but his conquests were lost by his captivity for three years by the 
court of Schwerin. 

The British Islands. ENGLAND, ruled by the ducal Norman line 
until 1154 A.D., when the Plantagenet, Henry II., ruled over Eng- 
land and part of France. This king began the conquest of IRELAND 
1167 A.D., which, from the eighth century, had fallen into barbarism 
under brutal tribal disorganisations, though nominally divided into 
four kingdoms. The island was granted by Pope Hadrian to Henry. 
The struggle of this king with Thomas-a-Becket (Archbishop of 
Canterbury) in the matter of Church privileges, which had been 
limited by the Constitution of Clarendon, 1164 A.D. ; the murder 
of Becketj his canonisation, and the penance done by the king, are 
important facts in the history of this reign. John, who reigned after 
Richard the Crusader, was compelled by his barons to grant Magnet 
Charta, 1214 A.D.; for which the Archbishop Langton and the 
barons were condemned by the Pope as having interfered with the 
rights of the Church, John having yielded the suzerainty of the 
kingdom to the legate of the Pope. Under Henry III. the barons, 
headed by Simon de Montfort, obtained for a brief period the pre- 
dominance, and procured the admission of the representatives of 
the cities into parliament, 1258-1265 A.D. WALES was annexed to 
England between 1265-1284 A.D., a step necessary for the peace of 
the west of England, and desirable as a step towards the civilisation 
of Wales. Edward I. returned from the Crusades 1273 A.D., and 
was led, through the dispute as to the succession of the last king, 
Kenneth, to interfere in the affairs of Scotland. 

6. Germany. Henry V., a bad son but able emperor, the last of the 
Salic line, died 1125 A.D. Lothaire III., Duke of Saxony, was elected, 
and agreed that the Church should enjoy the right of appointing its 
own officers, and that the investiture of bishops should follow their 
consecration. He also did homage to the Pope for the lands of 
Matilda, Duchess of Tuscany. The Slavi of the north of Germany 
were gradually absorbed by German rulers, the founders of duke- 
doms and marquisates. Conrad III., Duke of Franconia, the 
first of the Hohenstauf en family , succeeded, 1138 A.D. The party 
designation of the terms Guelf (Welf) and Ghibelline (Waiblinger) 



268 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

arose at the siege of Weinsberg, 1141 A.D., the Guelphs indicating 
the party of the Pope, the Ghibellines that of the emperor. Conrad, 
after his return from the Crusades, died 1152 A.D. He introduced 
the double eagle into the arms of the empire. Frederick Barbarossa 
succeeded. His five campaigns in Italy, 1154 to 1178 A.D., ended 
in the practical independence of the Lombard city-republics. In his 
first campaign he delivered Pope Adrian IV. from the patriot Arnold 
of Brescia, who had established a republic in Rome, and whom he 
put to death 1155 A.D. After his sixth visit into Italy, he caused 
his son Henry to marry Constance, the heiress of Roger II., king of 
Apulia (Naples) and Sicily, and died in the Crusade in the river 
Calycadnos, 1190 A.D. Henry VI., his son, inherited his father's 
energy, but without his nobler qualities. In asserting his claim to 
Naples and Sicily, he acted with the most revolting cruelty. Great 
disorders ensued, from 1198 to 1218 A.D., in the rivalries of opposing 
claimants of the empire. By two pragmatic sanctions, 1220 and 
1232 A.D., the nobles and bishops of the empire gained legal 
sovereignty over their towns and domains. Frederick //., Bar- 
barossa, son of Henry VI., returned from the Crusades 1228 A.D. 
His wars in Italy with the Lombard cities, led to his excommunica- 
tion by the Pope and the opposition of a rival emperor. He 
died 1250 A.D. The enmity of the Pope to Frederick II. and to 
the Hohenstaufen family arose mainly from their having united 
Naples and Sicily to the empire, by which Italy and the popedom 
were in fact placed under the power of the emperor. Frederick II., 
Barbarossa, was a remarkable man, and was called "the wonder 
of the world " : learned beyond his age, liberal, or perhaps in- 
different or sceptical in his religious views, but quite willing when 
on friendly terms with the Pope to persecute all heretics and 
schismatics. " He founded nothing, and he sowed the seeds ot 
the destruction of many things." Freeman says that " he was the 
last real emperor." 1 Conrad IV., his son, was driven from Ger- 
many to Apulia, and died 1254 A.D., leaving an infant son, Con- 
raddin. William, the rival emperor, was killed in a war with the 
Frieslanders, 1256 A.D. In these wars of the Hohenstaufens the 
grand duchies of Franconia and Suabia were broken up, and 
divided among smaller princes. After this, a period of anarchy, 
called the "grand interregnum," until the election of Rudolf of 
Hapsburg. Some changes had meanwhile been made in the German 
principalities by the Hohenstaufen emperor. BAVARIA and SAXONY 

1 Freeman, " Essays," first series, p. 306. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 269 

had been taken from the Guelph, Henry the Lion, 1180 A.D. Bavaria 
(deprived of Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, and the Tyrol) was given 
to the Willelbachs, who, in 1215 A.D., obtained the Palatinate of 
the Rhine by marriage. SAXONY was given to the Ascanian line, 
but confined to a small district, of which Wittenberg was the 
capital. POMERANIA, MECKLENBURG, HOLSTEIN, WESTPHALIA were 
independent under their several princes. The Archbishop of Cologne 
received part of Westphalia. The DUCHY of Saxony given to Otho, 
1235 A.D., by Frederick II. : hence the house of BRUNSWICK. On 
the fall of the Hohenstaufen, SUABIA and FRANCONIA were broken 
up, 1268 A.D., and many cities were made free imperial cities. 
Baden, Wurtemberg, Hohenzollern, Fiirstenberg became separate 
principalities. On the death of the last landgrave of Thuringia, 
1247 A. D., great disputes arose respecting the succession; but, in 
1264 A.D., THURINGIA was given to the House of Misnia, and HESSE 
to Henry of Brabant : hence the House of Hesse. Two nominal 
emperors, Richard of Cornwall, who visited Germany four times, 
and died 1272 A.D.; Alphonzo of Spain, who never made his 
appearance, was set aside by the electors. At length, through 
the influence of the Archbishop of Mainz, 1273 A.D., RUDOLPH OF 
HAPSBURG was chosen emperor. At this time the emperors had 
become pratically the tools of a princely aristocracy consisting of 
six prince-archbishops, thirty-five prince-bishops, besides abbots and 
abbesses, and the dukes, princes, counts, &c., who held lands under 
the empire. Nearly half the land was held by ecclesiastics, doing, 
however, military service for that land, and charged with the adminis- 
tration of justice to their vassals. These princes, by whom Germany 
was governed in the anarchy which preceded the election of Rudolf 
of Hapsburg, were as indifferent to the well-being of the empire as 
they were careful in the increase of their own territories and privileges. 
They usurped the power and prerogatives of the emperor, in order 
to place themselves in a position independent of all law, and by the 
help of their feudal vassals, a numerous and strong force, and by the 
clergy, laboured to crush civil liberty by a disastrous war with the 
cities, in which they were supported by the popes. The people in 
the cities, and the small knights holding lands direct from the 
empire lamented this internal anarchy, and demanded the election 
of an emperor. Meanwhile every petty noble exercised sovereignty, 
exacted tolls, plundered travellers ; so also the robber knights on the 
Rhine and elsewhere. 1 The cities, sensible of their inability to resist 

1 Menzel, vol. ii. pp. 24-71. 



270 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

individually, formed defensive and offensive leagues (i) the 
Hanseatic League, already mentioned; (2) the Rhenish League, 1254- 
1270 A.D., formed against the nobles and robber knights; (3) the 
Suabian League of cities followed a little later, and co-operated with 
the Rhenish League. The power of the popes and of the Church was 
maintained in Germany by the archbishopricks and the large num- 
ber of richly-endowed bishopricks. Monasteries and nunneries 
rapidly multiplied. Three archbishops, Mayence, Cologne, Treves, 
had anciently a precedence in the elections of the emperor. Four 
temporal princes united with them as electors; and these seven 
claimed the exclusive right of election in the fourteenth centnry i.e., 
the three archbishops, the Rhenish Palatine, the Duke of Saxon- 
Wittenberg, the Margrave of Brandenburg, the King of Bohemia. 
Into the diet of the empire, other nobles and bishops, with the repre- 
sentatives of the cities, soon forced themselves. There was some 
check on the anarchy of these time times by the VEHM-GERICHT, a 
secret tribunal which was formed under Engelbert, the regent of the 
empire, the utility of which was so generally admitted that in the 
fourteenth century it counted already 100,000 members. Its 
decisions were at once carried out, to the great terror of the criminals, 
and the advantage of society at large. The free peasantry in Suabia 
and Saxony, in the Alps, the Tyrol, Wiirtemberg, Friesland, Dit- 
marsh, in their several communes, retained for a long time their 
liberties, and in Switzerland and Friesland were able to secure them. 
But the misery of the peasantry, even when at the sole mercy of 
their lords, was by no means so great in the middle ages as it became 
after the great Peasant War of 1525 A.D. Such was the con- 
dition of Germany when Rudolph was elected emperor in 1273 A.D. 
In connexion with Germany were BOHEMIA, which had become, 
under Wratislaus, a kingdom, 1086 A.D., under Ottocar assumed a 
high position until humbled by Rudolf of Hapsburg, 1275 A.D. 
HUNGARY became a kingdom under Stephen, 1000 A.D. It was 
engaged in struggles with Venice for Croatia and Dalmatia, 1085- 
1117 A.D., and its kings aimed at the conquest of Bosnia and Bul- 
garia. Colonies of Flemings and Saxons were settled in Hungary 
and Transylvania, 1114 to 1140 AD. The kings of Hungary exer- 
cised great influence over Bulgaria, Servia, and the west of Russia ; 
but, by the invasion of the Moguls, all the cities were destroyed 
except three, and the populations greatly reduced. POLAND, which 
became a kingdom under Boleslaus, 1067-1077 A.D., also suffered 
from dissensions of the kingdom, and yet more greatly from the 
Moguls. LIVONIA, 1125 A.D., and ESTHONIA, 1220 A.D., were con- 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A. D. 271 

quered and colonised by the DANES, assisted by an order of Sword- 
bearers in Livonia, 1198-1202 A.D. Riga, founded by the Danes, 
1200 A.D. LITHUANIA, which had remained under its native rulers, 
began to assume an important position under Ryngold, its first grand- 
duke, 1220-1235 A.D. The Teutonic knights were invited by Conrad, 
the regent of Poland, 1231 A. D., as a bulwark against the barbarian 
Prussians. These knights, with their coadjutors, the Brothers oj 
the Sword, 1237 A.D., reduced PRUSSIA to subjection. They held 
the land as a fief of Poland. By the destruction of the Kumans and 
other barbarous tribes on the Black Sea and the Danube, by the 
Mongolian hordes, the MOLDAVIANS and the WALLACHIANS became 
independent states. RUSSIA, divided into several independent duke- 
doms at war with each other, was unable to resist successfully the 
Moguls, by whom the country was fearfully ravaged. The dukes 
were reserved as tributaries and vassals of the khans of Kipshak, a 
branch of the Mongol empire, 1224-1238 A.D. 

7. FRANCE, under its kings, was, during this period, necessarily 
engaged in wars to resist the encroachments of its powerful feudal 
vassal, the King of England. Louis VI. (the Fat), one of the best 
of the French kings, aimed to lessen the power of the nobles by 
the gradual abolition of serfdom, and by enfranchising the cities, 
1108-1137 A.D., being assisted in these efforts by the Abbot Suger, 
his faithful prime minister. Louis VII. (1137-1181 A.D.), by 
divorcing his wife, Eleanor, on his return from the Crusades, threw 
the whole of western France into the hands of her second husband, 
Henry II. of England. Philip II. (Augustus), 1180-1233 A.D., far 
exceeded his predecessors, and most of his successors in ability. 
He humbled John of England. In his reign the Albigenses in the 
south of France, a powerful sect opposed to the Church of Rome, 
were mercilessly destroyed by " the Crusaders," called out by Pope 
Innocent III. and commanded by Simon de Montfort. Under 
Louis VIII. (1223-1226) the Crusaders had fully accomplished their 
work. The good ST. Louis IX. (1226-1270) reigned at first under 
the regency of his mother, made peace with England, and restored 
Guyenne to Henry III. He was unfortunate in his crusade in 
Egypt, and died in the expedition against Tunis. Voltaire remarks 
of him, " It is not given to man to carry virtue to a higher point." 
He was canonised by Pope Boniface VIII. in 1297 A.D. To 
St. Louis the conduct of his brother, Charles of Arragon, in 
accepting the crown of the Two Sicilies from Pope Urban IV., and 
his further conduct in the murder of Conraddin, was highly offensive. 
Philip III. (le Hardi), 1271-1285 A.D., succeeded. He withdrew 



272 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

from Tunis. His reign began by the interment of five of the royal 
family, who had died in the expedition against Tunis. PHILIP IV. 
(LE BEL), 1285 A.D., was married to the heiress of Navarre. He was 
an able, but cruel, vindictive, and rapacious ruler, who greatly 
extended the royal authority, by humbling the great vassals, and 
raising the middle classes. His reign is, therefore, a most important 
one. The Parkment of Paris became under him the recognised 
court of the supreme administration, and the States- General were 
convoked in three orders the nobles, the clergy, and the represen- 
tatives of the people, 1302 A.D. There had obviously been a great 
material improvement in France in the preceding, and in this, the 
thirteenth, century. A clearance of forests and wastes had been 
effected ; the old cities grew in population and importance ; new 
cities arose, and were peopled by families escaped from serfdom. 
The reign of Philip (le Bel} is also remarkable for the first successful 
blow at the papal power. It was he who began the overthow of the 
mighty system of Hildebrand in the beginning of the fourteenth 
century. 

THE SPANISH PENINSULA (Spain). The Christian kingdoms of 
ARRAGON and NAVARRE were separated, H34A.D. Navarre was 
absorbed by France, 1274 A.D., but Catalonia remained with Arragon. 
In this kingdom the popular power made large advances. Citizen 
deputies attended the Cortes, 1150 A. D. A new code of laws was 
promulgated, 1247 A.D. ; while the barons, on their part, claimed a 
legal right to resist the king, 1284 A.D., if, in their opinion, his 
conduct was faulty, and this right was not formally repealed till 
1346 A.D. LEON and CASTILE were divided, 1157 A.D., until 1233 A.D., 
when they were again reunited. A new kingdom, afterwards called 
PORTUGAL, was wrested from the Moors by Henry, a prince of 
Burgundy, who had received from his father-in-law, Alphonso VI. of 
Castile, a grant of the territory between the Minho and Douro, 
1095 A - D - ) his capital was Coimba. Alphonso I., his son, after the 
Battle of Ourique, 1139 A.D., assumed the title of king, agreed to 
pay tribute to the Pope, and took possession of Lisbon. The 
Mahometans in Spain suffered a serious defeat from the kings of 
Arragon and Castile at Tolosa, 1212 A.D., and gradually receded, 
notwithstanding the help they received from the Almoravides of 
Morocco. The Algarves, taken from the Mahometans, were 
added to Portugal, 1253 A.D., by Alphonso III. 

ITALY. The wars arising out of the disputes between the emperors 
and the popes respecting investitures enabled the northern cities to 
assume a practical independence after 1183 A.D. The wars of these 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 273 

cities with each other cannot be detailed here. Most of the 
seignories, earldoms, and marquisates of Lombardy were conquered 
and absorbed by the cities in this period. Pisa and Genoa, Florence 
and Pistoia, Milan and Pavia, Venice, with all her varied enterprises, 
were often at war, and more or less entangled in the feuds of the 
Guelphs (on the Pope's side), or in those of the Ghibellines (for 
the emperor). Rome, with a nominal municipality, was completely 
in the hands of the Pope since the time of Innocent I. The 
Norman conquerors of Naples took possession of the free cities of 
Naples, Gaeta, Amalfi, and Bari. The Duchy of Benevento was 
broken up by them, 1017-1034 A.D. Robert Guiscard conquered 
Apulia, Calabria, and Sicily, 1060 A.D. Roger II. united Naples 
and Sicily, 1131 A.D. The Emperor Henry VI. , by his marriage 
with the heiress of Naples, united that kingdom to the empire, 
1191 A.D. Great hopes were entertained of this emperor, but his 
atrocious cruelties ruined the Ghibelline cause in Italy. He died, 
1196 A,D. The popes, jealous of the increased power over Italy 
which accrued to the emperors from the possession of Naples, soon 
raised up a rival able to compete with the House of Hohenstaufen. 
Urban IV., 1264 A.D., and Clement IV., 1266 A.D., induced Charles 
of Anjou, brother of St. Louis of France, to take possession of 
Naples, 1266 A.D. Conraddin, a boy of fifteen years of age, son of 
the Emperor Conrad IV., attempted to recover his inheritance, but 
was defeated, taken prisoner, and executed publicly in the market- 
place of Naples, 1265 A.D. This barbarous murder of a youth, the 
last of a renowned race, lowered the character of the popedom. 
On the scaffold Conraddin bequeathed his claims to Peter III. of 
Arragon ; but, meanwhile, Naples and Sicily were governed by 
Charles of Anjou. This wretch, seventeen years afterwards, died by 
his own hand at Fciggia, his fleets destroyed and his eldest son a 
prisoner in Spain. Venice, having acquired Dalmatia and Croatia, 
established the singular ceremony of the marriage of the Doge with 
the Adriatic, which was first celebrated, 1177 A.D., took part in 
the Crusades, and in 1202 A.D., after the conquest of Constantinople 
by the Crusaders, acquired a fourth part of the Eastern Empire. 
In 1297 A.D., the Grand Council closed, changed to active aris- 
tocracy, hence the Council of Ten. The Venetians obtained 
Albania, Greece, and the Morea, also the islands of Corfu, Cepha- 
lonia, and Crete. Genoa, like the rest of the republics, chose a 
Podesta, 1190 A.D., then a Captain of the People, 1257 A.D. Italy 
monopolised the trade with the Levant and also up the Black Sea. 
Caffa and Azoph belonged to Genoa. Smyrna, suburbs of Pera and 



274 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

Galata, Scio, Mitylene, and Tenedos, were also ceded to Genoa. Pisa 
was its chief rival, with which it had a war of two hundred years, 
ending in 1290 A.D., after the Genoese had conquered Elba, and 
destroyed the ports of Pisa and Leghorn. SAVOY, a marquisate in 
the north-west, increasing its power gradually. 

8. The EASTERN BYZANTINE EMPIRE declined rapidly after the 
accession of the Comneni, 1057 A.D. In 1081 A.D., a rebellion of 
the army placed Alexius I. on the throne, when the city of Constan- 
tinople was sacked by his army and plundered. He acted cautiously 
towards the Crusaders, and profited by their victories over the 
Seljuk Sultan of Roum (Iconium). His life has been written by 
his favourite daughter, Anna Comnena. Andronicus, the last of this 
dynasty, was cruelly murdered, 1185 A.D. Isaac Angelus, the 
successor of Andronicus, paid tribute to the Seljuk Sultan ot 
Iconium. A new Wallachian, or rather a second Bulgarian, kingdom 
was formed by a rebellion caused by additional taxation, 1186 A.D, 
The Crusaders of the Fifth Crusade restored Isaac Angelus, who 
had been deposed by his brother, 1202 A.D. His son, Alexis, 
failing to repay these services, the Crusaders took possession 
of Constantinople. By so doing, and by the division of the re- 
maining territory of the Eastern Empire, they thus broke down 
the barrier which that empire presented against the Turks, and 
prepared the way for the rise of the Ottoman Turkish power. A 
(so-called) LATIN EMPIRE at Constantinople was established 
Baldwin, Count of Flanders, on the throne with one-fourth of the 
former empire, as already related. The Greek Empire of JVicea, 
which was founded by the old Greeks, united with the other 
kingdoms of Thessalonia, 1255 A.D., and recovered Constantinople, 
1261 A.D. ; so that there remained two Greek Empires, Constan- 
tinople under the Palseologi, and Trebizond under another emperor. 

THE EMPIRE OF THE SELJUK TURKS, with all its kingdoms, had 
been absorbed by the Monguls under the successors of Ghengis 
Khan. Only one remained, that of Iconium or Roum, which 
lingered on till the beginning of the fourteenth century. Upon its 
ruins the petty chiefs of the race were afterwards united under the 
energetic rulers of the Ottoman Turks. 

THE MONGUL STATES were (i) the Khanate of Kipshack, which 
extended north of the Caspian and the Black Sea and inland over 
southern and central Russia, and to this Khanate the Russian princes 
were vassals; (2) Zagetai from Balk to the north-west; (3) Persia 
under the Ilkanian Dynasty, 

INDIA. The Ghizniste Dynasty of Lahore yielded, in 1153 A.D., 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 275 

to the Gorians, which, in its turn, was broken again, 1206 A.D. It 
was succeeded at Delhi by Khulub-uddin, the slave king, who 
conquered Bengal. The Mongolian hordes, though they troubled 
India, made there no permanent conquest. 

CHINA was, by degrees, conquered by the sons of Ghengis Khan, 
Oktai, and the Cublai Khan, 1280 A.D., whose authority was acknow- 
ledged "from the Frozen Sea almost to the Straits of Malacca." 
Marco Polo visited China in his reign. 

JAPAN disturbed by civil wars of the great nobles from 1156 A.D. 

EGYPT. The Fatemite Dynasty ended 1171 A.D., when Saladin 
the Great founded the Eyobite Dynasty ; he defeated the Christian 
princes of Palestine at Hitten, near Tiberias, 1187 A.D., and took 
Jerusalem. This was succeeded by the Baharite Dynasty of 
Mamelukes, 1250 A.D. All the Fatemites expelled from Syria by 

1291 A.D. 

NORTH AFRICA. The Almohades in about 1150 A.D. succeeded 
the Almoravides. The Merin Dynasty supplanted the Almohades, 
1258 A.D., in Fez and Morocco. The Dynasty of Xeriffs established 
1520 A.D. The travels of the Jew, Benjamin of Tudela, 1160 A.D., 
contributed very little to the geographical knowledge of the age. 

9. THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of this period has been partly 
anticipated in the remarks on the contest between the popes and the 
emperors respecting investitures, and also by those on the pre- 
dominant influence of the papacy in Europe. St. Bernard, of Clair- 
vaux, was the master-spirit of the Church, and, to some extent, of 
the sovereigns of Western Europe from 1113-1153 A.D. He was 
the great reformer of the monastic orders, with which his sympathies 
were identified, from the fact of his having founded one hundred and 
sixty of these institutions. In the Council of the Lateran, held by 
Pope Innocent III. (1215 A.D.), the doctrine of transubstantiation 
was declared to be that of the Church, and that auricular confession 
to a priest was absolutely necessary, at least once in the year. 
Furious decrees against the Albigenses, a large body of heretics in 
the south of France, were passed. In order to combat these 
heresies, the Mendicant orders were established as preachers, by 
whose zeal and activity the popular feeling against the Church 
was checked, 1210-1213 A - D - These were the Dominicans, the 
Franciscans, the Carmelites, &c., all of them Mendicant orders. 
But, in addition, the power of the sword was called in by Pope 
Innocent III., and by Simon de Montfort the Albigenses of 
Toulouse, &c., were mercilessly massacred, 1223-1226 A.D. As a 
specimen of the hatred of the Church system by certain scholars, 

T 2 



276 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D.> to the 

we may refer to two works in circulation: (i) "An Introduction to 
the Eternal Gospel," written by a supposed orthodox Abbot Ivaichius. 
It was full of blasphemous ravings, and was condemned by Pope 
Alexander IV., 1254-1261 A.D. (2) "The Book of the Three 
Impostors," which first appeared in the age of the Hohenstaufen, 
1154-1250 A.D. So also "The Commentary on the Apocrypha," by 
J. P. Oliva, 1259 A.D., a visionary. A formal reconciliation of the 
Greek Church with the Roman was agreed to at a Council held at 
.Lyons, 1274 A.D., but it was set aside by the Greek Emperor 
Andronicus. There was obviously a growing inclination and pre- 
paration for a rebellion against the papal authority. In permitting, 
in the thirteenth century, indulgences (for remittance of penances 
imposed by the Church) to be sold for money, a way was opened 
for great and scandalous moral evils, necessarily connected with a 
system by which the Church so greatly profited pecuniarily. Hence 
thoughtful men were led to doubt the divine foundation of Church 
authority. Some attempts were made in the missionary work of 
the Church in the eleventh century. The Nestorians had suc- 
ceeded in establishing missions in Tartary. They had bishops in 
Kashgar (Turkestan) in connexion with the Nestorian patriarch of 
Chaldea. 

10. THE LITERARY HISTORY OF THIS PERIOD is marked by the 
growth of the modern European languages in England, in France, 
in Spain, and Portugal and Italy. The Castilian (Spanish) dates 
from 1150 A.D.; the Portuguese and Italian, from 1206 A.D. In 
Germany the old national songs were in existence before 1170, and 
the Niebelunger lived about 1200 A.D. ; the Meistersingers, 1270 
A.D. Latin remained as the language of the Church^ of literature, 
and philosophy. An increased desire for learning was manifested 
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries ; the universities increased in 
number. Paris was called the new Athens 1150 A.D. Endowments 
for learning became frequent. Toulouse, Montpellier, Pisa, Sala- 
manca, Lisbon, Oxford, and Cambridge, were well supplied with 
students. So also, Angers, Montpellier, and Salerno were celebrated 
for legal studies ; Bologna for canon law, where Gratian published 
his decretals, and died 1150 A.D. ; and lastly, the College of the 
Sorbonne at Paris, founded 1251-1253. The Mendicant orders were 
particularly active in these educational centres, 1224-1249 A.D. 
Friar Roger Bacon was one of them, and wrote his " Opus Majus," 
1267 A.D. ; a work "strangely compounded of almost prophetic 
gleams of the future of science, and the best principles of the 
inductive philosophy, with a more than usual credulity in the super- 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 277 

stitions of his own time." 1 He had paid much attention to natural 
science, especially optics, and was acquainted with the explosive 
power of gunpowder (already known by the Chinese, Tartars, and 
Saracens). Towards the end of the thirteenth century the art of 
reading and writing had become common among the higher classes, 
though Philip the Bold, King of France, 1272 A.D., could not write. 
The great writers were in this period chiefly THEOLOGIANS and 
PHILOSOPHERS, generally combining the two. The study of ROMAN 
LAW was promoted by Irnerius at Bologna, 1100-1126 A.D. ; the 
Canon Law by Gratian, 1150 A.D. The first of a new school of 
theologians, the founders, in fact, of the scholastic theology, were 
Roscelin, 1090-1100 A.D., and Peter Abelard, 1079-1102 A.D. The 
great orthodox theologians were first Peter Lombard, aptly termed 
by Milman (vi. 457) the Euclid of his school; his great work, "the 
Sentences," was the standard for many years, 1159-1162 A.D. ; then 
THOMAS AQUINAS, 1240-1274, A.D., who, by his "Summa Theo- 
logiae " fixed the theological status of the day, until then mainly 
confined to St. Augustine. In the " Summa " is found the final result 
of all that has been decided by popes or councils ; all that was 
taught by the Fathers or accepted from traditions, or argued 
in the schools, or inculcated in the confessional it is the authorita- 
tive, authentic, acknowledged code of Latin Christianity. 2 John 
of Salisbury, 1181 A.D.; Peter of Cluny, 1156 A.D.; Robert Pullen, 
1150 A.D., were all able and popular theologians in their day. 
A remarkable scholar, Albert the Great, of Cologne, 1222-1280 
A.D., left twenty-one volumes of theology and general literature, the 
"Encyclopaedia of the Middle Ages." "He awed his age by his 
immense erudition .... his name, 'the universal doctor,' was 
the homage of his all-embracing knowledge .... of his enormous 
assemblage of the opinions of the philosophers of all ages ; and his 
efforts to harmonise them with Christian theology is a kind of eclec- 
ticism an unreconciled realism, conceptualism, and nominalism, 
with many of the difficulties of each." 3 At the beginning of the 
thirteenth century all the works of Aristotle began to be translated; 
before this, his logic alone had been in the possession of the schools. 
Stephen Langton, the patriotic Archbishop of Canterbury, 1206-28, 
and Robert Grostete, Bishop of Lincoln, deserve to be remembered. 
Raymond Martin (Bishop of Barcelona) in the thirteenth century, is 
remarkable for his Hebrew and Arabic learning. The Historians are 

1 Hallam, vol. i. p. 114. 2 Milman, vol. vi. pp. 459, 460. 

8 Milman, vol. vi. p. 437. 



278 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

Henry of Huntingdon, 1135-1154 A - D - ; Florence of Worcester, 
1060-1118 A.D. ; Geoffry of Monmouth, 1152 A.D. ; Giraldus Cam- 
brensis, 1075-1218 A.D.; and other English chroniclers, as William 
of Malmesbury, 1100-1142, and Matthew of Paris, 1200-1259. 
Among the Greeks Anna Comnena, the historian, 1137-1148; 
Eustathius, the Homeric critic, 1185 ; Nicetas, 1206 ; and Logothete, 
1258-1308, historians. Also among the Saracens, John Reschid, 
(Averrhoes) the physician of Cordova, and philosopher, who identified 
the human soul with the universal soul of Deity and of the world, 
1149-1245 A.D. Maimonides, the Jew, 1208 A.D., who was the 
leader of a latitudinary party in the Jewish Church ; Averrhoes and 
Avicenna are placed by Dante among the philosophers who wanted 
baptism only to be saved. There was a great alarm raised in the 
beginning of the thirteenth century respecting the spread of scepti- 
cism. Aristotle was blamed in connexion with Averrhoes; and Pope 
John XXII. condemned the Aristotelian philosophy. Law was 
studied in England. Glanville (Sir John), Justiciary of England, 
wrote a treatise on law, 1165-1190 A.D. ; Bracton also, 1245-1267 
A.D., wrote on the law of England, and was followed by his 
supplementers, Britton and* Fleta. 

The cultivation of letters by the KHALI FS of BAGDAD, EGYPT, 
and CORDOVA has already been noticed. Some of these Mahometan 
rulers are with reason suspected of encouraging scepticism. Under 
the patronage of these men, the Syrian Christians translated into 
Arabic the Greek medicinal, mathematical, and philosophical works. 
The college at Cordova was frequented by many Christian students 
from France and Italy, by whom the study of Hebrew and Arabic 
was afterwards promoted in Christendom. The Nestorian Church in 
Persia was also instrumental in spreading the knowledge of the 
Greek philosophy among the Mahometans. 

ii. Before entering upon the SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY, we must 
refer to PETER ABELARD, who was the real founder next to Ros- 
celin, of that School. Milman has done justice to his philosophy : 
"The nature and peculiar philosophy of Abelard .... his con- 
ceptualism might, in itself, not merely have been reconciled with the 
severest orthodoxy, but might have opened a safe, intermediate 
ground between the NOMINALISM of Roscelin and the REALISM of 

Anselm and William of Champeaux The conceptualism of 

Abelard allowing real existence to universals, but making these 
universals only cognisable as mental conceptions to the individual." T 

1 Vol. iii. p. 9. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 279 

The controversy between Nominalism and Realism was properly 
one of philosophy, but it entered into the theology of the day. 
The REALISTS with Plato maintained the objective and external 
reality of universals, either anterior^ as eternal archetypes in the 
divine mind, or in re as forms inherent in matter j the NOMINALISTS 
regarded them as having only a subjective existence as ideas con- 
ceived by the mind, and have hence in more modern times led to 
a kind of compromise between the two extremes, known to the men 
of our day by the name of CONCEPTUALISM. Roscelin, the first of 
the Nominalists, went farther than this, and denied, as Hobbes and 
Berkeley with many others since have denied, all universality except 
as to words and propositions. Pope John XXIII. , the University 
of Paris, 1339 A.D, and Louis XI., 1473, denounced the Nominalists, 
though he afterwards tolerated their writings. The following list of 
the fathers of the Scholastic Philosophy may be useful : 

A.D. 

Alan of Lyle, the universal doctor noo 

William of Champ, the strong doctor noo 

Alexander Hales, the irrefragable doctor , 1230 

Thomas Aquinas, the angelical doctor 1256 

Bonaventura, the seraphic doctor 1260 

Roger Bacon, the wonderful (also far advanced in natural 

philosophy beyond his age) doctor ... ... ... ... 1240-1289 

Albertus Magnus, also called the universal doctor .. ... 1223-1280 

Egidius de Columne, the most profound doctor ... ... 1280 

John Duns Scotus, the most subtle doctor ... ... ... 1304 

Durand, the most resolute doctor ... ... ... ... 1300 

William Occham, the invincible doctor ... ... ... 1320 

Raymond Lully, the most enlightened doctor... ... ... 1300 

Walter Burley, the perspicuous doctor... ... ... ... 1300 

John C. Gerson, the most Christian doctor ... ... ... 1392-1429 

All these men, of blameless repute, of keen acumen and of pro- 
found erudition, have been the object of sarcasm and scorn, not only 
from the unthinking parrots who repeat without understanding the 
dogmas and sayings of the popularities of the day, but also by men 
competent to judge, had they allowed themselves time for inquiry and 
due consideration. The merit of these SCHOOLMEN is that they 
anticipated the views and positions held by succeeding theologians 
and philosophers. All the great questions of speculative theology 
relating to predestination, election and reprobation, free knowledge 
and contingency, were fought out by these men in the Middle Ages, 
and in addition "they were leaders on the side of a wronged 
humanity in that firm-set struggle which ranged through long 
centuries against a gigantic ecclesiastical despotism, which aimed to 



280 From the Crusades, 1096 A.D., to the 

be the sole arbiter of man's faith." . . . . " There was never want- 
ing a Schoolman to fight on the side of liberty of conscience and 
freedom of thought, until the grand result was obtained, the right of 
thinking as we will and of speaking as we think." 1 In a most 
valuable work entitled " the Great Schoolmen of the Middle Ages "" 
(from which many extracts have been taken in this narrative), by W. 
J. Townend, the testimonies of the great master-minds whose names 
are placed in the margin, will be sufficient to counteract the mistakes 
of the ill-informed revilers of these great men. 

We may add testimonies from two very different authorities as to- 
the merits of this philosophy. "There was a vast amount of 
genuine thought (nowadays sadly neglected) in the latter scholastics, 
such as Albert the Great, the so-called universal doctor ; Thomas 
Aquinas, the angelical doctor; Duns Scotus, the subtle doctor; 
and of William of Occam, the invincible doctor; these men did 
probably all that was possible to harmonise natural and revealed 
religion, to preserve the peace between reason and faith. With them 
scholasticism wrote itself out." 2 " With all its seeming outward 
submission to authority, Scholasticism at last was the tacit universal 
insurrection against authority. It was the swelling of the ocean, 
before the storm ; it began to assign bounds to that which had been 
the universal all-embracing domain of theology. It was a sign of 
the re-awakening life of the human mind, that theologians dared 
.... to philosophise. There was waste, waste of intellectual 
labour, but still // was intellectual labour." 3 

12. The Troubadours -, the poets of Provence, in spite of their 
worthlessness, must be noticed ; they belong to the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries; their poems and songs in the vernacular 
language delighted the refined but somewhat corrupt court of the 
rulers of Provence at Aix the capital ; except as useful in the study 
of the transition period of the Latin dialects, they are, all of them, 
worse than useless. 

13. A most important discovery is attributed to this period of the 
world's history, that of THE PROPERTIES OF THE MAGNETIC NEEDLE. 
It has been attributed to Flavio Gioja, of Amalfi, 1290 A.D., but it 
was known long before, being described by Guyot, of Provence, who 
lived about 1190 A. D. The Chinese were acquainted with it long 
before it was known in Europe. Towards the close of the thirteenth 
century its properties were fully known and described. The effect 

1 Herren. * Westminster Review, April, 1883, p. 316. 

* Milman, vol. vi. p. 475. 



Reign of Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. 281 

of this discovery upon the progress of geographical discovery may 
be seen in the maritime enterprises of the Portuguese in the begin- 
ning of the fifteenth century. Commerce was extended by the 
Crusades, which called into action the maritime power of Venice, 
Genoa, and all the maritime cities of Italy and Southern Europe,, 
through the necessity of the Crusaders for transport of men, war- 
like stores, and provisions to the ports of the Levant. 



State of the World, 1273 A.D. 

EUROPE. 

SCANDINAVIA. Norway, Sweden, and Denmark separate king- 
doms. 

THE BRITISH ISLANDS. ENGLAND and IRELAND under one king, 
SCOTLAND and WALES separate kingdoms. 

FRANCE. France gradually acquiring unity by the falling in of 
the fiefs, but impeded by the wars with England, whose king 
was a holder of the most important fiefs. 

SPAIN. Two Christian kingdoms Castile and Arragon. The 
Mahometan khalifate at Cordova divided among many 
petty states. The new kingdom of Portugal increasing its 
territory gradually. 

ITALY. The cities of Lombardy independent republics, so also 
Genoa, Venice, Florence, Pisa, and others. Venice had 
acquired some dominion in Dalmatia and other provinces 
of the Eastern Empire. Rome and its vicinity under the 
popes. Tuscany with Lombardy were nominally fiefs of the 
German Empire. Naples under the family of Charles of 
Anjou. Sicily under the kings of Arragon. 

GERMANY at this time included Burgundy and Aries as fiefs of 
the empire. The northern Slavi had been incorporated by 
the empire. 

To the east of Germany were Hungary, Poland, Bohemia, with 
the Teutonic Knights in Prussia. Esthonia and Livonia 
were partly under Danish rule. Lithuania, under its dukes, 
had begun to assume the dignity of a civilised state and to 
aim at political influence. Moldavia and Wallachia were, 



282 State of the World, 1273 A.D. 

with BULGARIA, a powerful state, formidable to the Eastern 
Empire of Constantinople. The irruptions of the Mogul 
Tartars, 1220-1230 A.D., had destroyed the barbarous tribes 
on the Euxine. 

RUSSIA, divided into petty states, controlled by the Mogul khanate 
of Kipshack. 

The Eastern Empire of Constantinople suffered greatly by the 
taking of the city by the Latin Crusaders, 1202 A.D., and by 
the division of its territory among the chiefs. Constantinople 
and part of Greece formed a separate empire under the 
Latins, Trebizond another under the Greeks. Nice, also an 
empire under the Greeks, in 1261 A.D. recovered Constan- 
tinople, so that there were in 1273 A. D. two empires, Con- 
stantinople and Trebizond. SERVIA was a powerful inde- 
pendent state. 

ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR, partly to the emperors of Constantinople and those 
of Trebizond, part to the Seljuk sultans of Iconium. (The 
Ottoman Turks at this time a small tribe.) 

SYRIA under the Egyptian rulers. 

PERSIA and the EAST under the Mongolian rulers of Persia, 
Zagetai (Balk), Kipschack on the Black and Caspian Seas 
territory, Russia was subject (the last of the Abasside khalifs 
at Bagdad was murdered by the Mongol Hulaku, 1258 A.D.). 

INDIA. The Slave kings over North India to Bengal. 
CHINA. Under the descendants of Ghengis Khan. 
JAPAN. Disturbed by civil wars. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT. Saladin founded the new Dynasty 1173 A.D. Then 
the Mameluk Dynasty follows, 1250 A.D. Syria is subject to 
Egypt. 

MOROCCO. Almoravides superseded by the Almohades 1150 
A.D., then the Merin Dynasty 1258 A. D. In TUNIS and 
ALGIERS the Lassis, 1206 A.D. 



NINTH PERIOD, 



From Rudolph of Hapsb^lrg, 1273 A.D., to 
the Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 
1520 A.D. 






i. THIS is the period of transition between the middle ages and 
modern Europe. The leading matters are (i) the consolidation of 
the kingdoms of England, France, and Spain ; (2) the continued dis- 
integration of Germany, by which the imperial power was reduced to 
a mere nullity ; (3) the rise of the House of Austria to the headship 
of the empire ; (4) the collision of the interests and claims of France, 
Germany, and Spain in Italy ; (5) the extinction of the Eastern Greek 
empire in the East(i^^}, and the consequent extension of the power 
and territory of the Ottoman Turks in Europe, singularly coincident 
with (6) the consolidation of the czarship in Russia after its deliver- 
ance from the rule of the Mogul Tartars, 1469-1479 A. D., Russia 
being, from its geographical position and natural aspirations, the per- 
sistent check upon Turkish aggression; (7) the great advance of 
learning and science aided by the invention of printing, 1420- 
1467 A. D. ; (8) two inventions of great importance in their uses in 
war and navigation established the superiority of the civilised races 
over the barbarians ; (9) the maritime discoveries of the Portuguese 
along the West Coast of Africa, and around the Cape of Good Hope 
to India, 1486-1497 A.D., followed by the discovery of America 
by Columbus, 1492 A.D. great events, the benefits of which belong 
to the human race; and (10) progress of trade, agriculture, and of 
society in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 



284 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

I. The Consolidation of the kingdoms of England, France, 
and Spain. 

ENGLAND. Happily Edward I., though he gained, in the reign of 
his father, the victory over Simon de Montfort, 1264 A.D., found it 
necessary on his accession to the crown, after his return from the 
Crusades, to call together parliaments imperfectly constituted, and at 
last, in 1295 A.D., a full parliament representing all classes. He had 
learned that by these parliaments the consent of all classes could 
more readily be gained for the taxation which was necessary to the 
supply of his wants, year by year increasing through the wars in 
which he was engaged. Wales was annexed to England 1282 A.D. 
A dispute as to the right of succession to Alexander III., king of 
Scotland, who died 1286 A.D., and whose daughter also died 
1290 A.D., led to the interference of Edward I. as arbitrator. By 
him John Baliol was declared to be the lawful heir. But, in 
1296 A.D., this king allied with France against his patron, and a war 
commenced, which lasted thirty-two years, until 1328 A.D. Edward I. 
died 1307 A.D. Scotland under Bruce was, in 1328 A.D., acknow- 
ledged as independent of England. Under Edward III. the so-called 
" Hundred Years' " War began with France, in 1337 A.D., and was 
continued in its first stage till 1360 A.D. It recommenced in 
1369 A.D. to the truce of 1396 A.D. Again it began in 1415^0., 
and ended in 1453 A.D. Edward III. gained a sea-fight at Helvoet- 
sluys in 1340 A.D., and the land battles of Crecy, in 1346 A.D., and 
of Poitiers, in 1356 A.D. Henry V. resumed the war in 1415 A.D., 
and died King of France and England. By the heroic efforts of 
Joan of Arc the Maid of Orleans, Charles VII. recovered his king- 
dom, 1437 A.D. The failure of the kings of England to conquer 
France was a great blessing to both countries, especially as it deprived 
England of the territory held in France by the Norman and Plan- 
tagenet kings, thus making it a purely insular power ; and the long 
contest established and consolidated a national feeling in France 
itself. The civil war, that of the Roses, arising out of the contests 
between the Houses of York and Lancaster for the crown, com- 
menced with the deposition of Richard II. by Henry IV., 1399 A.D. 
Actual war began in 1455 A.D. by the battle of St. Albans, and 
ended, in 1485 A.D., by the battle of Bosworth Field, in which 
Richard III. was killed, and Henry VII., uniting by his marriage 
the claims of both Houses, became king, the first of the Tudor 
Dynasty. On his accession, the House of Lords had been reduced 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 285 

to thirty through deaths in battle or on the scaffold ; Henry VIII. 
began to reign 1509 A.D. 

FRANCE. Philip IV. (the Fair) le Bel, 1285-1314 A.D., success- 
fully resisted Boniface VIII., and thus led the way to the lowering of 
the influence of the papacy. The papal bulls were publicly burnt, 
the States-General supporting the king. Boniface himself was seized 
and imprisoned. The next Pope but one, Clement V., was elected 
through Philip's influence, and removed the seat of the papacy to 
Avignon, where it remained from 1305 to 1376. Tempted by the 
wealth of the Knights Templars, Philip IV. determined upon the 
destruction of the Order, and after a fierce and cruel persecution 
he succeeded in his design, and obtained also the confiscation of 
their wealth. The Order, consisting of 15,000 knights, was abolished 
by the Pope, 1312 A.D., and the Grand Master executed 1314 A.D. 
The charges against him were probably false, but the Order had 
become useless as a defence of Christendom against the infidels, and 
the dissolution of the Order desirable : but there was no reason for 
the infliction of death. The conduct of the king, and of the Pope, 
and of the judges was disgraceful. Louis X. (le Hutin), 1314- 
1316 A.D., enfranchised the serfs, obliging them, however, to pay for 
their freedom. Philip V., le Long, 1316-1322 A.D., succeeded. An 
insurrection of the peasantry in 1320 A.D., followed by murders of 
the lepers and the Jews, disgraced this reign. Charles IV., 1322- 
1328 A.D. On his death the direct line from Hugh Capet ended, 
and Philip VI., of the collateral line of Valois succeeded 1328 A.D. 
(He was the grandson of Philip III.) The claim of Edward III. as 
the nearest heir to Charles IV. led to the long war in which the 
kings of England attempted to obtain the throne of France. 
Philip VI., after uniting Champagne, Dauphiny, and Brie as fiefs of 
the crown, 1340-1345 A.D., died 1350 A.D. John the Good, his son, 
succeeded. He was taken prisoner by Edward III. of England after 
the battle of Poitiers. The country was ravaged by numerous bands 
of marauders called Free Companies. Great troubles also followed 
from popular risings in Paris under Marcel, the Prevot of the munici- 
pality. The first salt tax, 1355 A.D., was most unpopular, and is, 
perhaps, connected with the frightful insurrection, THE JACQUERIE, 
which arose among the peasantry, 1358 A.D., accompanied by an 
attempt at the wholesale extermination of the nobles, the burning of 
their chateaux, &c., in all the northern and western districts. They 
were at length defeated at Meaux, and 7,000 slain. Peace with Eng- 
land was made at Bretigny, 1360 A.D. Soon after, the Black Pesti- 
lence ravaged France, carrying off a large number of the population. 



286 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

The duchy of Burgundy, which reverted to the crown as a fief in 
1361 A.D., was thoughtlessly granted by him to his younger son, Philip 
the Bold, and became under the rule of his descendants an important 
power. Charles V. (the Wise), 1364-1380 A.D., regained from the 
English much that John had lost. Charles VI. had to contend with 
popular commotions in Paris and Rouen. He assisted the Count 
of Flanders to put down the revolt of the Flemings under Philip van 
Artevelde, who, with 25,000 Flemings, perished in the battle of 
Rosebecque, 28 Nov., 1382 A.D. a great triumph of royalty and 
feudality over popular rights, which enabled the king to put down 
mercilessly the municipal insurrections in Paris and the cities of 
Northern France. The king's insanity, 1392 A.D., led to great dis- 
orders. Then followed the invasion and successes of Henry V. of 
England, who for a brief term was regarded as King of France, 1415- 
1420 A.D. Charles VII., 1422-1461 A.D., by the courage of the 
Maid of Orleans, and the weakness of Henry VI. of England, was 
enabled to regain the throne and expel the English out of France. 
In the States-General held at Orleans, 1439 A.D., he established a 
permanent military force, by which bands of soldiers, called ecorcheurs, 
and the insurrection, the Praguerie, were put down. This was the 
origin of a standing army, which began with 6,000 men. In 1453 A.D. 
the dream of English rule on the Continent was finally dispelled by 
the capture of Bordeaux, and nothing was left to the English after a 
war of 120 years except Calais. This result was equally beneficial to 
both countries. Charles VII. secured the liberties of the Gallican 
Church by solemnly adopting, in the National Council at Bourges r 
several of the decrees of the Council of Basle, which he published 
under the title of "Pragmatic Sanctions," 1438 A.D. Louis XL 
succeeded. His crafty and most detestable tyranny was useful in 
the consolidation of France. Maine, Anjou, Provence, Rousillon, 
Cerdagne, Alenon, Perche, and Guienne were annexed to the 
monarchy. By the death of Charles the Bold, the last Duke of 
Burgundy, in the attack upon Nancy in Lorraine, January, 1477 A.D., 
the duchy of Burgundy (part of the dominions of Charles) was 
annexed to France. The rest of Charles the Bold's dominions, by 
the marriage of his daughter Mary to Maximilian of Austria, helped 
to the speedy aggrandisement of that family, and became the origin 
of a fierce and bloody rivalry between France and the Empire of 
Germany for near two hundred years. Louis XI. died, 1483 A.D. 
He first assumed the title of "Majesty" and " Most Christian King." 
The Dominions of Charles the Bold included (i) the duchy of 
which Dijon was the capital ; this was a fief of France granted in 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 287 

1361 A.D. ; (2) Flanders, Artois, Rhetel, and Nevers, all fiefs of 
France, were obtained by Philip le Hardi by marriage, also the 
county palatine of Burgundy, a fief of the empire ; (3) the Nether- 
lands a fief of the empire ; (4) the duchy of Brabant and Hanhault 
fiefs of the empire with Luxembourg. By the addition of Lorraine 
these territories would have formed a large and powerful kingdom, 
richer from the industry of the Netherlands than any other kingdom 
of that period. Charles's object was to establish this kingdom. 
Had he succeeded, he would have been a barrier between Germany 
and France, and a much more powerful one than the so-called 
kingdom of the Netherlands, established in 1815, after the fall of 
Napoleon. " He aimed, in short, as others have aimed before and 
since, at the formation of a state which should hold a central 
position between France, Germany, and Italy a state which should 
discharge with infinitely greater strength all the duties which our 
own age has endeavoured to throw on Switzerland, Belgium, and 
Savoy." 1 

Charles VIII. succeeded Louis XL, and by marriage annexed 
Bretagne to the crown, 1491 A.D. His expedition to Italy, at first a 
success, was eventually a failure. He died, 1498 A.D. Louis XII., 
called " the father of his people," also made an expedition into Italy 
to little purpose, and was engaged in the league of Courtrai against 
Venice. He had a war with Henry VIII. of England, and then 
married his sister, May, 1514 A.D., and died ist January, 1515 A.D. 
Francis I. succeeded, and was, by his claims on Italy, the rival of 
Charles V., of Germany and Spain. 

SPAIN. -The wars between the two Christian kingdoms of Spain 
saved the Mahometan kingdoms from extinction, and prolonged 
their existence for two hundred years. These dissensions among 
the Christian kingdoms ended with the union of Castile and Arragon 
under Ferdinand and Isabella, 1476 A.D. Then followed the 
conquest of Grenada, 1492 A.D., and the subjection of the Moors 
and of all Spain (twelve states) to one rule, with the exception of 
Portugal, which had been won from the Moors, 1085 A.D., by Henry 
of Burgundy, and formed into a distinct kingdom, 1139 A.D. The 
marriage of Joanna, the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, to 
Philip, the son of the Emperor Maximilian and of Mary, the heiress 
of Charles the Bold of Burgundy, established the preponderance of 
Spain in the Netherlands and Germany. Charles V. of Germany, 
and First of Spain, son of Philip and Joanna, began to reign in Spain 

1 Freeman's "Essays," first series, p. 338. 



288 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

1516 A.D., and was elected Emperor of Germany, 1519 A. D., and 
crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle 1520 A.D. At this period Spain, though 
united under one king, was a union of kingdoms, each having its 
own Cortes (Parliament). CASTILE had in its Cortes representatives 
of cities as well as of the nobles and bishops ; but the nobles were 
exempt from taxation, and the representatives of the seventeen cities 
were, since 1312-1350 A.D., chosen by the magistrates of each town, 
seldom exceeding twenty-four in number, and ARRAGON had limited 
the power of its elected king, elected by the chief of the nobility, 
and confirmed by the Cortes, when strong enough to have a voice, 
1133 A.D. The Cortes consisted of the nobles and bishops, the 
knights and the deputies of the royal towns ; these were few in 
number, but some of them sent ten representatives, and none less 
than four. A committee sat between the adjournment of the Cortes 
to manage the revenue, and there was a powerful officer, the justicia, 
appointed by the king from the knights, exercised extraordinary 
powers, assisted by a council of seventeen chosen by the Cortes. 
Catalonia and Valencia were free and independent governments, each 
having its Cortes composed of three estates. In 1285-1291 A.D., 
they were finally united to Arragon. The insurrection of Padilla 
and others in Castile and Arragon, 1520-1522 A.D., against the king 
and the nobles failed, and led to the destruction of legislative free- 
dom in the course of the century. 

II. The continued Disintegration of Germany ', by which the 
Imperial power was reduced to a mere nullity. 

2. RUDOLPH of Hapsburg, who began to reign in 1 2 73 A.D., did not 
save the empire, but he laid the foundation of the house of Austria, 
by which, in due time, the dignity and power of the imperial crown 
was upheld. He humbled Ottocar, king of Bohemia, and pre- 
pared the way for the incorporation of that kingdom by his own 
family at no distant period. Germany remained as before a mere 
geographical expression, applied to a country in which German was 
spoken, and in which a large number of princes, dukes, electors, 
counts, margraves, &c., with certain cities, had acquired and exercised 
a practical independence. While Rudolph lived he was respected 
and trusted by the Swiss, who were proud of him as their country- 
man, but on his death, 1291 A.D., they became the subjects of his 
son Albert, the Archduke of Austria, whose rule was offensive to 

1 Dyer, vol. i. p. 63. 



Emperor diaries V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 289 

them. His object was to found a kingdom in Switzerland for his 
son, and to "put down the local independence. Thirty-three dis- 
tinguished men formed a plan of resistance at Rutli, 1307 A.D., 
which was carried out in 1308 A.D. Duke Leopold of Austria was 
defeated at Morgarten i6th November, 1315, a battle which showed 
the power of infantry over cavalry. From that time the Swiss 
CANTONS became practically a distinct nation. A Federal Diet was 
established by them, 1352 A.D. In the war with the Dukes of 
Austria the Swiss gained the battle of Sempach, through the self- 
sacrifice of Arnold Winkelreich, Qth July, 1386 A.D. (the Swiss con- 
federation was completed 1573 A.D. by the accession of Appenzell, 
1573 A.D.). At this period the plague known as the Black Death 
spread over Europe, 1348-1356 A.D., carrying off twenty-five millions 
in Europe, in Asia thirty millions, accompanied by floods, mists, and 
then by droughts, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, singular aerial 
phenomena, and unhealthy winds. Rudolf had been succeeded in 
the empire by Adolphus of Nassau, then by Albert, son of Rudolf, 
1298 A.D.; on his murder, 1308 A.D., by Henry VII. of Luxemburg, 
who endeavoured to revive the interests of the empire in Italy, and 
died there 1313 A.D. In his reign the cities of the empire appear 
as a third order in the Diet of Spires, 1309 A.D. ; the cities were 
favoured by the emperor as a check upon the licence of the nobles. 
For the same reason the emancipation of the serfs was encouraged 
in Germany, as also in France and all over western Europe. The 
affairs of Germany were disturbed by the action of the popes, who, 
after the death of the Emperor Frederick II. (1256 A.D.), presumed 
to claim the right of nominating to the crown of Germany, as well 
as the bestowment of the imperial crown upon the ruler when 
chosen. This claim the submissive demeanour of Rudolf and his 
successors tended to strengthen. Louis IV., 1313-1347 A.D., 
laboured to oppose this usurpation, and had to contend with his 
rival Frederick of Austria as well as with the popes, and died, 1347 
A.D. Charles IV., 1347-1378 A.D. (of Luxemburg), by a side-blow 
relieved the empire from the Pope's claims. He published an edict 
called the Golden Bull, which was to be the fundamental law of the 
empire for the future. By this the rights and privileges of the seven 
electors, the Archbishops of Mentz, Treves, and Cologne, the King of 
Bohemia, the Duke of Saxe-Wittenberg, the Margrave of Brandenburg 
(Ascanian line), and the Count Palatine of the Rhine, 1356 A.D., were 
defined ; the Wittlebacks of Bavaria being excluded. Peace " appears 

to be promoted by the institutions of Charles IV but these 

seven electoral princes acquired with their extended privileges a 

u 



2QO From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

marked and dangerous preponderance in Germany Charles IV. 

legalised anarchy and called it a constitution." 1 " Thus Charles, 
bent upon the aggrandisement of his house, united Brandenburg 
to the kingdom of Bohemia .... thus ruling over a range of 
country from the confines of Austria to Pomerania. Nevertheless, 
he was all this time working for strangers. His son Sigismund had 
already mortgaged the Margavate of Brandenburg to the family of 
Hohenzollern, and by that act laid the foundation for the greatness 
of that house, while the greater part of his other lands fell also to 
the house of Austria." The confederacies of the cities for mutual 
protection increased ; besides the Hanseatic League, the Rhenish 
and the Swdbian Leagues, there were now the Friesland League, 
the Swabian League of forty-one cities. These cities were repre- 
sented in the Diets, and were generally opposed to the nobles. The 
princes of the empire also formed distinct leagues. Winceslaus, the 
successor of Charles IV., 1378-1400^.0., without power, could only 
remain passive in these struggles between the cities, the knights, and 
the nobles. After his deposition there was anarchy, until his suc- 
cessor in the empire was Sigismund, 1411 A.D., who held the Council 
of Constance 1414 AD., to put an end to the schism in the pope- 
dom, and caused Martin V. to be received as the true Pope. The 
burning of John Huss and Jerome of Prague at this council by his 
sanction as heretics, was warmly resented by the Bohemians, and 
caused the Hussite War 1420-1436 A.D., and the spread of Hussite 
opinion. Peace was made on conditions favourable to the Hussite 
demands of the administration of the Lord's Supper in both kinds. 
Under Sigismund the Ascanian line of the Electorate of Saxony 
became extinct 1423 A.D., and the electorate was given to the Mar- 
grave of Messina, whose grandsons, Ernest and Albert, are the 
founders of the two lines which divide the Saxony of our days. 
The first general tax through the empire was fixed by the Diet of 
Nuremburg, 1427, 1428 A.D. Sigismund was succeeded in Bohemia 
and Hungary by his son-in-law, Albert II. of Austria, 1438 A.D. By 
his election to the office of emperor the House of Austria was 
identified with the empire. He was succeeded by Frederick III., 
his cousin, 1440 A.D. In his reign the Turkish Sultan Maho- 
met II., with one hundred and sixty thousand men having besieged 
Belgrade 1456 A.D., was defeated by the heroic efforts of John 
Capistran, the papal legate, and John Hunyades Corvinus, assisted by 
Pope Calixtus III. ; twenty thousand Turks were killed, and the 

1 Bryce, pp. 236, 237. 2 Kohbrauch, p. 308. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 291 

Turkish power for many years crippled. Bohemia and Hungary 
became, for a time, separate kingdoms on the death of Albert II., 
son of Wladislaus Posthumus, 1457 A.D. Bohemia chose George 
Podribrad, and the Hungarians Matthias Corvinus. Such was the 
weakness of Frederick III,, that with his wife and son Maximilian, 
he was besieged in his castle at Vienna by the burghers of that city 
in 1462, and only released by the German princes and the King of 
Bohemia. The empire was distracted by feuds ; the Palatines of the 
Rhine successfully resisted the emperor; but an attempt upon the 
city of Nuremburg by seventeen princes, 1449-1456 A.D., was un- 
successful. One event, the death of Charles the Bold of Burgundy. 
1477 A.D., which led to the union of Maximilian, the son of the 
emperor, to Mary the heiress, 1478 A.D., had an important bearing 
on the future of Europe. This Maximilian was elected king of the 
Romans, 1486 A.D., and emperor, 1493 A.D. In 1495 A - D -> by the 
edict of "perpetual public peace," the practice of private war either 
of the German princes or states, in towns or individuals, was 
forbidden. In the same year, by the erection of the Count of 
Wiirtemberg into a Duchy under Eberhard the Elder, the foundation 
of the future kingdom of Wiirtemberg was laid. By the Diet of 
Augsburg, in 1500 A.D., there was created a permanent council, con- 
sisting of those sent by the six circles into which Germany wa; 
divided i.e., Franconia, Bavaria, Swabia, Upper Rhine, Westphalia, 
and Lower Saxony. Each circuit sent a count and a bishop. There 
were two deputies for Antwerp and the Netherlands, and two for the 
chief cities. This council was superseded in 1507 A.D., by a revival 
of a reformed imperial chamber originally established by the Diet at 
Worms in 1495 A - D - Philip, the son of Maximilian by Mary, 
married Joanna, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, and their 
son, Charles V., became King of Spain 1516 A.D., and Emperor of 
Germany 1519, 1520 A.D., having first agreed to certain limitations 
by a capitulation to which he swore. In the fifteenth century South 
Germany, and especially the commercial cities, as Augsburg, were 
rich and prosperous. The local states had a voice in the taxation 
in Bavaria, 1425 A.D.; in Saxony, 1478 A.D.; Brandenburg, 1472 A.D. 
Imperial fairs at Leipzig were sanctioned by Maximilian, 1497 A.D. 

III. The rise and establishment of the House of Austria tj the 
headship of the Empire. 

3. The founder of the house, Rudolph of Hapsburg, was one of 
the petty knights, owing fealty to the empire, ready to fight on any 
side, but, on the whole, inclined to serve the Guelphs. He had 

u 2 



292 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

rendered a service to Werner, Archbishop of Mayence, by escorting 
him safely through the Alps, and had by him been recommended to 
the Pope. Having served under Ottocar, King of Bohemia, and 
fighting for and against the nobles at war with the cities of Strasburg 
and Basle, he was a ready instrument for the purposes required by 
the German nobles the checking the ambition of Ottocar, 1273 
A.D. He lost no time in using the opportunity of his position in 
order to enrich and exalt his family. In 1282 A.D. he invested his 
sons in the sovereignty of the Austrian dukedoms, and thus laid the 
foundation of the House of Austria. He could not secure his son's 
election to the empire, but in 1438 A.D. Albert of Austria, descended 
from his son, was elected emperor. Bohemia and Hungary also 
became, at the commencement of the sixteenth century, the posses- 
sions of the family, as they remain to this day. It was the extent 
of territory already possessed by the Austrian family which secured 
their election to the empire. The empire of Germany was renounced 
by Francis II. in 1804 A.D., who then assumed the title of Emperor 
of Austria. The revenue of Spain and the Netherlands, added to 
the prestige of the imperial title, gave the Austrian power a great 
advantage in the contests between the Emperor Charles V. and 
Francis I., king of France in the sixteenth century. 

IV. The collision of the Interests and Claims of France, Germany, 
and Spain in Italy. 

When Charles of Anjou was induced by the Pope to take Naples 
from the Hohenstaufens, 1266 A.D., he laid the foundation of future 
enterprises injurious to the French monarchy. Charles, Count of 
Maine and Provence, had transmitted his rights as the heir of the 
Anjevin house to the kingdom of Naples to Louis XI. Charles VIII. 
entertained the extravagant project of not only conquering Naples 
but of re-establishing a Christian empire in the East and re-con- 
quering Palestine. The Duke of Milan, Ludovico Sforza, fearing 
the interference of the King of Naples to restore his nephew whom 
he had deposed, sent an embassy to Charles VIII., inciting him to 
make good his claim to Naples. The expedition of Charles was 
at first successful. Naples was conquered, 1495 A.D. His success 
alarmed the powers of Europe, and a league was formed to cut 
off the retreat of the French. Charles had to fight the battle of 
Fornovo to secure his retreat to France, 1495 A.D., and Naples and 
Sicily remained under Spanish rule. This expedition of Charles 
was the beginning of those expeditions distant from their own 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 293 

frontiers which compelled the sovereigns of Europe to raise standing 
armies, the feudal militia, with its limited period of service, being of 
no great value in wars of long continuance and distant from home. 
From this time Italy became one of the great battle - fields of 
Europe, as the Low Countries (Netherlands) afterwards became. 
This rivalry of France and Spain affected the politics of Europe in 
the sixteenth and following centuries. 

V. The extinction of the Eastern Greek Empire of the East (1453), 
and the consequent extension of the power and territory of t/ie 
Ottoman Turks in Europe, 

When the Latins in the fifth Crusade, 1202-1204 A - D -? conquered 
Constantinople and appointed a Latin emperor, the more warlike 
and patriotic party of the Greeks established two empires, that of 
Nice and Trebizond. " The Nicene Emperors, Theodore Laskaris 
and John Batatres, rank among the best and greatest in Eastern 
history. Their throne was supported by the merits of a just 
government, and was defended a new feature in the annals of the 
Eastern Empire by a national and patriotic army. The Emperor 
of Nikaia, unable, like his Constantinopolitan predecessors, to hire 
the choicest warriors of all nations, was driven to depend on the 

valour of his own people But when Constantinople was 

recovered, 1261 A.D., and the throne had passed to the dynasty of 
Palaeologi, the scene is altogether changed .... on the whole, 
during the duration extending over nearly two centuries of the 
Second Empire of Constantinople, both empire and city were but 

the shadow of their former selves Under the Palaeologi it 

(the empire) sunk below the level of Genoa, Venice," ] &c. Mean- 
while, the petty Seljukian dynasty of Roum, shaken by the Mogul 
invasion, dwindled away, superseded by that of the Ottoman Turks^ 
a kindred race, who had settled in a body of four hundred families 
under the protection of the Sultan of Roum, 1250 A.D. Othman, 
their emir, began, in 1307 A.D., to absorb the petty Turkish chief- 
tains, and thus established a new power in Asia Minor. Orchan 
organised the Janizary troops, 1326-1359 A.D. Either as allies 
or as enemies of the Eastern Empire, they made frequent expedi- 
tions across the Hellespont into Europe, and in 1356 A.D., Solyman, 
the son of Orchan, took possession of Tzympe and Gallipoli in 
Europe. In ten years the whole of Roumelia was conquered by 

1 Freeman's " Essays," third series, p. 270. 



294 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. t to the 

Amurath ; the Bulgarians, Bosnians, Servians, Albanians, and Hun- 
garians, were alarmed, and ineffectual (because dissentient) resistance 
was offered by them to the progress of the Turks, 1358-1389 A.D. 
Much is it to be regretted that the power of SERVIA, which had 
existed as an independent kingdom since 1040 A.D., and which, 
under Stephen Dushan, 1336-1356 A.D., had comprehended 
Macedonia, Albania, Thessaly, and Northern Greece, and had 
aspired to the possession of Constantinople, was not maintained 
after the death of that hero. We might have had a Servian Eastern 
Empire gradually assimilating itself to European civilisation instead 
of the barbarous Turk, whose only good quality is brute animal 
bravery. Amurath conquered Bulgaria, advanced his territory to 
the Danube, 1389 A.D., and defeated the Servians and their allies 
at Kassova, 2yth August, 1389. Amurath was assassinated while 
the battle was raging, but lived to condemn the captive king of the 
Servians to death. Bajazet, his son, immediately put to death his 
brother Yacoob, who had fought valiantly in the battle, and thus 
prevented any rivalry for the throne. Wallachia submitted, 1391 
A.D. A Crusade, headed by Sigismund, King of Hungary (after- 
wards emperor), was defeated at Nicopolis, 24th September 1396, with 
great slaughter, and three hundred persons of rank, taken prisoners, 
were murdered in cold blood. Nothing could surpass the insolence 
of Bajazet after this. Greece was conquered, and Constantinople 
was summoned to surrender, 1400 A.D. Fortunately the conquests 
of Tamerlane, the reviver of the Mogul empire of Ghengis Khan, 
saved Constantinople for half a century. In a battle near Angora 
in Asia Minor, the army of Bajazet was destroyed and himself taken 
prisoner and died 1403 A.D. After this the power of the Turks in 
Asia Minor appears to have been checked, until Mahomet I., a son of 
Bajazet, 1413-1421 A.D., revived it. Amurath II. , for twenty years, 
had to encounter the Servians, Bosnians, and Hungarians. In 
I 443 A.D., Hunyades led the Hungarians across the Balkans and 
conquered an advantageous peace, 1444 A. D., by which Solyman gave 
up all claim to Servia, Wallachia, and Hungary. This peace was 
broken through the influence of the Pope. The King of Hungary, 
Ladislaus, Cardinal Julian, &c, advanced to Varna, where, loth 
November, 1444, they were defeated, the king and the cardinal and 
a large portion of the army killed ; Bosnia, Servia, and Wallachia 
again conquered by the Turks, and even Hunyades was defeated 
in a great battle at Kassova, October 1448. G. Castrow Scanderbeg, 
the Albanian, by his valiant persistance, held Albania for a time, 
from 1443-1 453 A.D. Mahomet II. succeeded and took Constanti- 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 295 

nople, 1458 A.D., the last of the Palseologi dying in the breach, 2oth 
May, 1453 A.D. For ten days the brutal cruelty of the conquerors 
was unchecked. "The Roman empire had run its course, and .... 
the Greek nations needed recasting in the furnace of adversity. 
Yet the work might perhaps have been done by other hands than 
those of the barbarians and the infidels. The dream of a Sclavonic 
empire again flashes before our eyes. Had Servian Stephen, like 
Bulgarian Samuel in an earlier day, been blessed with the fortune of 
Othmar and Orchan, Amurath and Mahomet, the difficulties and com- 
plications of our own time might have been avoided. Had the 
Servian czar entered Constantinople in the fourteenth century, the 
Ottoman sultan might not have entered in the fifteenth." x The news 
of the fall of Constantinople filled Europe with shame and indig- 
nation, and with fear when Belgrade was besieged in 1456 A.D., 
though unsuccessfully, by Mahomet. The empire (or rather the 
town) of Trebizond was soon conquered. Mahomet carried on war 
with the Venetians almost in sight of the city, and aimed at the 
conquest of Italy, taking Otranto and destroying the opposing army, 
1 4th August, 1480. A large army was preparing for another attack, 
when suddenly Mahomet died, 3rd May, 1481. 

Thus Turkey became a European power. "The earlier emirs and 
sultans were the wisest rulers, as well as the most skilful generals of 

their time The special vices of Ottoman rule came in only 

gradually ; its foul moral corruption begins with Bajazet ; its 
devilish cruelty and perfidy begins with Mahomet the Conqueror. 
.... The Ottoman conquest spread barbarism and desolation 
over the fairest and most historic regions of the world." 3 

VI. The Consolidation of the Czarship in Russia after the deliverance 
of Russia from the rule of the Mogul Tartars. 

4. The Russians were encouraged to throw off the yoke of the 
Moguls, under which the habits and national character of the 
population had been greatly debased by the victory of Demetrius 
Douski over the Lithuanians and Moguls on the plains of Kouli- 
Kofi, 8th September, 1380. This hero was afterwards unfortunate; 
his capital, Moscow, burnt by the Moguls, 1382 A.D., and he 
died broken-hearted in 1388. The power of the "Golden Horde " 
of Kipshack was, however, shaken by the conquests of Tamerlane, 
and became less formidable to the Russian princes. Ivan III., the 

1 Freeman's " Essays," third series, p. 273. 2 Ibid., p. 272. 



296 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

Great, began the consolidation of Russia by the conquest of 
Novogorod and of several of the independent princes. He 
threw off the yoke of the great Horde of Kipshack, 1478 A.D., 
which had been weakened by the division of its power among the 
khans of Kazan, Sarai (Astrachan), Crimea, the Nogais, &c., &c. 
Already the Czars had begun to revive and cherish ambitious pro- 
jects for the occupancy of Constantinople. Thus Ivan III. married 
Sophia, the daughter of Thomas Palaeologus, the brother of the last 
emperor. Her father died at Rome, and the Pope, by the advice 
of Cardinal Bessarin, offered her to Ivan III. Sophia travelled 
from Rome to Lubeck, from Lubeck by sea to Revel, and was 
received in triumph at Pskof, Novogorod and Moscow, 1472 A.D. 
She incited Ivan to throw off the Tartar yoke. With her came 
many Greek emigrants from Rome and Constantinople ; they fur- 
nished Russia with statesmen, diplomatists, theologians, and artisans, 
and with Greek books, which were the beginning of the existing 
library of the Patriarchs. From that time the two-headed eagle, 
which had been the imperial sign of the emperors of Constantinople, 
was assumed by. the Russian sovereign. Vassali Ivanovitch, his son 
and successor, 1508 A.D., persevered in the great work, the union of 
the empire. This consolidation of the Russian power under one 
czar and the decline and fall of the Mogul rule are singularly coinci- 
dent with the establishment of the Ottoman Turks in Europe. It 
seems probable that directly or indirectly Russia is destined to be 
the avenger of Christendom, as the destroyer of the Turkish rule in 
Europe. If prevented by the jealousy of the European powers from 
possessing itself of Constantinople, the fear of such a conquest will 
compel the "Great Powers," sooner or later, to place that city 
independent of the Sultan of Turkey. Whatever may be the defects 
and evils of Russian rule, the people and government are nominally 
Christian, and therefore capable of progressive improvement, of 
which the Turks, whatever good qualities they may be supposed to 
possess, are incapable. 

VII. The great advance of Learning and Science furthered by the 
invention of Printing, which is now somewhat affectedly called the 
Renaissance. 

" It is to the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that we are 
accustomed to assign that new birth of the human spirit if it ought 
not rather to be called a renewal of its strength and quickening of 
its sluggish life with which the modem time begins But it 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 297 

must not be forgotten that for a long time previous there had been 
in progress a great revival of learning .... the twelfth century 
saw that revival begin with that passionate study of the legislation 
of Justinian .... the thirteenth century witnessed the rapid spread 
of the scholastic philosophy, a body of systems most alien both in 
subject and manner to anything that had arisen among the ancients 
.... the spirit of whose reasoning was far more free than the 
presumed orthodoxy of its conclusions suffered to appear. In the 
fourteenth century there arose in Italy the first great masters of 
painting and song .... along with the literary revival, partly 
caused by, and partly causing if, there had been also a wonderful 
stirring and uprising in the mind of Europe .... the revolt of the 
Albigenses, the spread of the Cathari and other so-called heretics, 
the excitement created by the writings of Wycliffe and Huss, 
witnessed to the fearlessness wherewith it could assail the dominant 

theology It took a form more dangerous .... in the 

attacks so often repeated from Arnold of Brescia downward, upon 
the wealth and corruption of the clergy, and above all of the papal 

court Manners were still rude and governments unsettled, 

but society was learning to organise itself upon fixed principles to 
recognise, however faintly, the value of order, industry, equality ; t<^ 
adapt means to ends, and to conceive of the common good as the 
proper end of its own existence. In a word, politics had begun to 
exist, and with them there had appeared the first of a class of 
persons whom friends and enemies may both, though with different 
meanings, call ideal politicians men who, however various have 
been the doctrines they have held, however impracticable many of 
the plans they have advanced, have been, nevertheless, alike in their 
devotions to the highest interests of humanity, and have frequently 
been derided as theorists in their own age, to be honoured as the 
prophets and teachers of the next." x To these admirable remarks 
the following from an eloquent writer of a different class may be 
appended : " The period between the fall of the Roman Empire 
and the Renaissance was not a mere time of torpor, if we consider 
the vast fabric of European civilisation, the foundations of which 
were then laid ; there are human qualities which a state of com- 
parative barbarism (the Dark Ages, as we call them) encourages, and 
which civilisation destroys. Is the architect of Westminster Abbey 
less intelligent so as to fear comparison with the architect of the 
Parthenon ? The mere fact is, that between the eleventh and four- 

1 Bryce, pp. 239-242. 



298 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

teenth centuries the cities of Italy developed all the charm and 
material conveniences of civilised life, and they had restored the 
study of the ancient classics." * The idea of progress as the law of 
our nature slowly followed. It was some time before men perceived 
that, however desirable it might be to study and profit from the past, 
there was also a present and a future with which the interests of 
humanity were linked, and for which men must think and labour. 
For the first time, it has been said, " men opened their eyes and saw." 
The revival of letters was preceded and accompanied by the increase 
of schools and universities, and by the larger supply of books in 
MSS., through the ample supply of paper made from cotton intro- 
duced by the Arabs, which had superseded the papyrus of the old 
empire and the parchment of the middle ages. Paper (cotton) 
began to be used about the ninth century. Linen paper followed, 
supplied first in Germany, where there was a manufactory at Nurem- 
burg in 1390 A.D., though there are proofs of the existing linen paper 
one hundred years earlier. The INVENTION of PRINTING, 1420-1467 
A.D., furnished a supply of books equal to and even beyond the 
immediate demand. (i) This invention is ascribed by some 
to Gutenberg, of Mentz, who began to print 1450 A.D., and in 
^452 A.D., by the help of Schaeffer, of Mentz, completed the work, 
1452 A.D. Fust was a partner of Gutenberg in Mentz. By others 
to Koster, of Haarlem, 1430 A.D. The first Bible, the Mazarin 
Bible, was printed about 1455 A - D -> at Mentz. The grandest and 
most celebrated early printing-office was that of Aldus Manutius, in 
Venice, 1490-1515 A.D. It is said that the knowledge of the dis- 
covery was revealed by the workmen about 1462 A.D., and these 
spread abroad. Caxton began printing in England, 1476 A.D., at 
AVestminster. But in China printing from tablets was known at the 
close of the second century A.D., and block-printed editions of the 
Chinese classics were common in the sixth century; thence in the 
eighth century printing was introduced into Japan, probably from 
Korea. Movable clay types are said to have been used in China 
in the eleventh century, and metal types early in the fourteenth 
century. Types were first cast in copper by the Koreans early in the 
fifteenth century. 2 " Instead of speaking of the discovery of the 
art of printing, it would be more correct to speak of the application 
of the printing-press to the creation of books. The Greek potters 
.... imprinted their names upon their sepulchral lamps. Among 
the ruins of Herculaneum and Pompeii loaves were found which were 

1 J. A. Symonds. 2 Q uarter i y Review, January, 1883, p. 198. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 299 

stamped with the bakers' names But, while the material for 

books, whether papyrus or parchment, was dear, and while the 
number of readers was small, the cost of printing would have 
exceeded the cost of transcribing. I think it is Archbishop Whately 
who remarks, that it is to the comparative cheapness of paper, 
rather than to any inventive genius on the part of a printer, that we 
are indebted for the art of printing books. Cheap paper was the 
parent of printing." 1 By the fall of Constantinople a large number 
of learned men were driven to Italy, and revived by their teaching 
the knowledge of the Greek language and of Greek literature ; this 
gave an additional stimulus to the demand for copies of the classic 
authors. Hallam gives a list of the estimated number of books 
printed in Italy to the end of the [fifteenth century, in all 4,987, 
besides those printed in fifty other places in Italy ; in Germany and 
the Netherlands, 2,924; in Paris, 751; in England 141. It is 
certain that 10,000 editions of books or pamphlets were printed in 
Europe from 1470 A.D. to 1500 A.D. ; some say 15,000, others 
20,000, more than half of which appeared in Italy. The Vulgate 
alone passed through 91 editions. The influx of light and the 
wide horizon so suddenly opened out were calculated to bewilder 
and dazzle even the learned. In this renaissance, this new birth of 
humanity, the study of revived antiquity stimulated the desire for 
novelties in philosophy and religion, as opposed to orthodoxy. This 
feeling, unchecked by experience and practical piety, was encouraged 
by the licentiousness of the courts of the princes of Italy, the papal 
court not excepted. The new sciolists in philosophy indulged in the 
wildest speculations, chiefly pantheistic; they discussed the materiality 
of the soul, believing with some of our philosophers " in the 
existence of a potency in matter " adequate to the explanation of all 
mental phenomena ; some supposed that the universal soul, the one, 
was diffused through all nature, and so on, every free thought advocat- 
ing using up the shreds and patches of the old eastern theosophies, 
as if the product of his own mental powers. "Erasmus expresses his 
astonishment at the blasphemies he heard. Luther was scandalised 
by the conduct of the officiating priests in the celebration of the 
Mass. No one (in a certain court class or literary circle) passed for 
an accomplished man who did not entertain heretical opinions 

about Christianity Under Leo X., the tone of good society 

had become sceptical and anti-Christian, but a reaction took place in 
the minds of the most intelligent men in those who partook of the 

1 Dean Hook's "Lives of the Archbishops," vol. v. pp. 361, 362. 



300 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

refinement of their age without being corrupted by it .... they 
met to the number of fifty or sixty, among whom were four who- 
afterwards became cardinals and one who was canonised." * In the 
fifteenth century the mystical piety of such men as Tauler, Gerson, 
and Kempis, bear witness to the existence of spiritual life and 
orthodoxy. The Reformation prepared the way for the full dis- 
cussion of all questions respecting the authority of the Scriptures 
and the real character and teachings of Christianity. 

VIII. Two Inventions of great importance, though very different in 
their Uses, established the Superiority and the Safety of the 
Civilised Man over the Barbarian. 

5. The discovery of gunpowder, and its introduction into Europe 
from the East, in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, led to a 
great change in the art of war, in its efficiency and in its cost, the 
general result being in favour of humanity wars are fewer, shorter, 
and less destructive. Its increased cost acts in favour of peace ; the 
burden falling upon the industry of the community arouses opposi- 
tion to war itself. Already we see that wars have created a taxation, 
even in the richest European communities, which is drawing nearer 
and nearer to infringe on the capital, the accumulated wealth of the 
community. The modern population of Europe will not submit to 
a taxation which devours profits and incomes beyond a certain point, 
much less will they permit capital to be touched. Hence the danger 
of discontent and the provoking of opposition to governments, in 
other respects deserving obedience and support. The other discovery, 
that of the mariner's compass from China in the eleventh or twelfth 
century, prepared the way and made possible the voyages of the 
Portuguese to India and of Columbus to America. The compass is 
first alluded to by a satirist, Guyot of Provence, 1190 A.D., and by 
Raymond Sully, a magistrate and natural philosopher, in 1286 A.D. 
The notion that it was first invented or used by Flavio Gioja of 
Amalfi, 1300-1320 A.D., has been repeatedly refuted. 

In this period the whole social and political fabric of the Middle Ages, 
bastd on military tenure, broke down. The light-armed footmen and 
bowmen and the use of artillery, first heard in Western Europe 
in the battle of Crecy, 1346 A.D., began a complete change in the 
art of war. Infantry began to be regarded as the main strength of 
an army. The Swiss were the first organisers of this force. Their 

1 Ranke, " History of the Reformation," vol. i. p. 74. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 301 

soldiers, armed with pikes, sabres, and clubs, proved their ability to 
compete with the cavalry of Burgundy at Granson and Morat in 
1476 A.D. The heavy cavalry, cased in iron, could only fight in an 
open plain, and were checked by a fortification or intrenched camp. 
Hand-guns (arquebuses) were used in 1432 A.D., and pistols and 
muskets with locks in 1517 A.D. Artillery was first used by the 
Moors in Spain, about 1312 A.D., and by the Scots in 1339 A.D., and 
by the Turks at the first siege of Constantinople, 1422 A.D. The 
Hungarians, Poles, and other of the Eastern peoples, as the Russians, 
had the means of raising large bodies of cavalry from 40,000 to 
150,000. The first standing army was begun by Charles VII. of 
France in 1439 an d 1448 A.D., but the great cost of supporting and 
paying men in times of peace restricted their use to the care of 
fortifications. This institution was generally acceptable as a wise 
division of labour. Its effect in enabling kings to increase and 
preserve their power, even in opposition to the opinion of their 
people, was not at once perceived. There is one great evil accom- 
panying it, namely, nations fighting by proxy. A large portion of the 
population know little practically of the sufferings of war, and are 
generally ready to resort to it on occasions in which, if those who 
love war had themselves to engage in the fight, might hesitate. 

IX. The Discovery of a Passage to India by the Cape of Good Hope. 

6. The discovery of a passage to India by the Cape of Good 
Hope, and the discovery and opening out of the western continent of 
America, coinciding with the opening of a direct communication 
with India and the extreme East, marked the commencement of a 
new era in the history of mankind. The Portuguese led the way in 
maritime discovery. Prince Henry, son of John I., King of Portugal, 
began a series of expeditions of discovery along the West Coast of 
Africa. In 1412 A.D., Cape Nun, the extreme point hitherto, was 
passed, and Cape Bogador was reached. From Sagrez, near Cape 
St. Vincent, his place of retirement and study, Prince Henry first 
suggested the use of the compass and calculations of latitude and 
longitude in navigation, and how these might be ascertained by 
astronomical observations. In the attempt to pass Cape Bogador, 
1418 A. D., Puerto Santo and Madeira were discovered. In 1434 A.r. 
Cape Bogador was passed. In 1440-1442 A.D., the Rio de Oro, close 
to the Tropic, was reached, and ten blacks (negroes) were carried to 
Portugal, the first ever seen there! In 1449 A.D., the coast was 
explored sixty leagues beyond Cape Verde, and the equinoctial 



302 From Rudolph of Hapsbnrg, 1273 A.D., to the 

line was passed soon after. These discoveries were arrested for a 
while by the death of Prince Henry, 1463 A.D. " He flattered him- 
self that he had given a mortal wound to Mahometan! sm, and had 
opened a door to the universal propagation of Christianity ; and to 
him, as their primary author, are due all the inestimable advantages 
which ever have flowed, or will flow, from the discovery of the 
greatest part of Africa and of the East and West Indies." * Under 
John II. the discoveries were prosecuted with vigour. In 1481 A.D., 
the Gold Coast was taken possession of and a fort erected; in 
1484 A.D., a fleet sailed some distance south of the line, and in 
1486 A.D., Bartholomew Diaz passed the cape which he named the 
Cape of Storms, but to which John, looking forward to the hope of 
reaching India, gave the hopeful designation of the Cape of Good 
Hope. In 1497 A.D., Vasco de Gama sailed for the express purpose 
of reaching India. The night previous to his sailing, July 7, was 
spent in prayer by himself and companions in a chapel by the 
seaside near Lisbon. Next day the shore of Belem was crowded 
with the population of Lisbon, a numerous procession of priests 
sang anthems and offered prayers to heaven. The deep sympathies 
of the multitude were for the adventurers, as rushing upon certain 
death, and they watched until the fleet vanished from their sight. 
After encountering the storms west of the Cape, the fleet passed that 
promontory, and reached India, April, 1498 A.D. The Cape had 
been passed before by the Phoenicians sent by Pharaoh Necho, 
606 E.G., who, after a tedious voyage of three years, reached the 
Mediterranean and Egypt (eastward from the Red Sea) ; but there 
was no special reason to encourage a continuance of this adventure. 
It was in the fifteenth century, when access to the East had been 
closed to Europeans by the oppressions and fanaticism of the 
Mahometans, that the resolution to reach the East by the sea was 
carried out. Pope Eugenius IV., 1431-1447 A.D., gave the Portu- 
guese a right to all the territory they should discover from Cape Nun 
to India. The discovery of America by Christopher Columbus had 
been preceded by the enterprise of the Northmen, who reached, first 
Greenland, and then New England, at the close of the tenth century. 
There is also a tale, not well authenticated, of the discovery of a 
great western land by the Welsh prince, Madoc, 1170 A.D. But 
these discoveries were very different in their character from the bold 
attempts of Columbus to reach India by a western route. " He had 
received a learned education, and the study of the geographical 

1 Mickle, "Lusiads." 



Emperor Charles V., of Germany, 1520 A.D. 303 

systems then in vogue impressed him with a strong conviction that 
a voyage to India by a course directly westward was quite practicable, 
with the degree of nautical science then possessed. From the old 
imperfect maps of Ptolemy he was led to believe that the parts 
of the globe known to the ancients embraced fifteen hours or 
225 degrees of longitude, which exceeds the actual limits by more 
than one-third. The discovery of the Azores on the west side had 
lengthened the space by one hour, and the accounts gleaned by 
Marco Polo in Asia induced him to think that the isles connected 
with this continent stretched out so far to the eastward that their 
distance from Europe could not be great. Columbus, however, was 
without the fortune necessary to fit out ships ; and, when he attempted 
to interest some of the princes of those times in his proposals, he 
encountered neglects and difficulties which would have exhausted 
the patience of any mind less ardent than his own. At length, after 
many delays and discouragements, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain 
supplied him with three small vessels, two of them only half-decked, 
and in this little armament, accompanied by 120 men, he set sail for 

the port of Palos, August 3, 1492 A.D On leaving the 

Canary Islands, he entered on a region of ocean where all was 
mystery. The Trade w r ind, however, bore him steadily along, and 
the labours of the ships proceeded cheerfully, till the increasing 
length of the voyage .... produced a mutinous spirit, which all 
the address and authority of Columbus would not have been able to 
quell, had the discovery of land happened one day later than it did. 
Columbus, says Humboldt, on sailing westward of the meridian of 
the Azores .... sought the east of Asia by the western route, not 
as an adventurer, but according to a preconceived and steadfastly 
pursued plan. He had on board the sea-chart which the Florentine 
astronomer, Toscanelli, had sent him in 1477 A.D. If he had 
followed the chart, he w r ould have held a more northern course, 
along a parallel of latitude from Lisbon. Instead of this, in the 
hope of reaching Zipangu (Japan), he sailed for half the distance in 
the latitude of Gomera, one of the Canary Isles. Uneasy at not 
having discovered Zipangu, which, according to his reckoning, he 
should have met with 216 nautical miles more to the east, he, after" 
a long debate, yielded to the opinion of M. A. Pinzon, and steered 
to the south-west. The effect of this change in his course curiously 
exemplifies the influence of small and apparently trivial events on 
the world's history. If Columbus .... had kept his original 
route, he would have entered the warm current of the Gulf Stream, 
have reached Florida, and thence, perhaps, have been carried to 



304 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

Cape Hatteras and Virginia. The result would probably have been 
to give the present United States a Roman Catholic population 
instead of a Protestant English one a circumstance of unmistakable 
importance. Pinzon was difided in the formation of his opinion by 
a flight of parrots towards the south-west. ' Never ,' says the 
Prussian philosopher, ' had the flight of birds more important con- 
sequences' It may be said to have determined the first settlements 
on the new continent, and its distribution between the Latin and 
Germanic races. It was on October 1 2 that the west world revealed 

itself .... Guanahani or Watling Island But he (Columbus) 

died ignorant of the real extent and grandeur of his discoveries, 
still believing that the countries he had made known to Europe 
belonged to that part of eastern Asia which the ancients call India." 1 
After Columbus, Magellan the Spaniard is to be celebrated as the first 
circumnavigator. He entered the Pacific Ocean by the straits which 
are called by his name, November 28, 1520 A.D.. and, though he was 
killed in the Philippine Islands, 1521 A.D., his ship had a glimpse of 
the west shores of New Holland, and in due time arrived safe in 
Seville. A Spanish vessel sailed through Torres Straits, and saw the 
north-east coast of New Holland, and gave it the name of New 
Guinea, 1545 A.D., sixty years before Torres is said to have discovered 
that strait. It is affirmed by Petherick, 1884 A.D., that the Portuguese, 
so early as 1510 A.D., had discovered both the east and west coast 
of that island continent, though this is doubtful. Pope Alexander VI. 
gave to Ferdinand and Isabella all the countries they might discover ; 
but, to avoid collision with the grant made by Eugenius IV. to the 
Portuguese, 1492-1503 A.D., Alexander traced a line a hundred 
leagues west of the Azores, beyond which line to the west all that 
could be discovered should be Spanish. It is a remarkable fact that 
Cardinal Gasper Contarini, the ambassador of Venice to Charles V., 
arrived in Spain just as the ship Victoria (Magellan's ship) arrived 
at Seville. He was the first to explain why she arrived a day later 
than her log indicated. Americus Vespuccius, who had visited 
America, had his name applied to the continent, 1503-1507 A.D. The 
effect of these discoveries was first to astonish the most careless and 
unthinking. The knowledge of the vast extent of the globe gave an 
enlargement to the mental as well as to the physical horizon. The 
full perception of the grand future opening out to the enterprise 
of Europe was, however, only by slow degrees recognised. The 
ijnorance of the potentates of Europe and their insensibility to the 

1 " Encyc. Brit.," ninth edition, vol. i. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 305 

importance of these discoveries are surprising. They could not see, 
in these vast fertile regions of the west, the wonderful timely 
provision reserved by divine wisdom for the homes of the teeming 
millions of the Old World, and only made known to them when tho 
progress of the arts of civilised life made it possible for the popula- 
tion of Europe to occupy them with advantage. In fact, the advan- 
tages of a regulated emigration and settlement of the surplus 
labouring and artisan class has not yet been perceived by the more 
advanced mind of the nineteenth century. England was happily 
not altogether indifferent to the cause of geographical discovery. 
Henry VII. was willing to further the plans of Columbus had he 
failed in his application to the court of Spain, and he sent Sebastian 
Cabot on a voyage which resulted in the exploration of all the east 
coast of North America from Labrador to Florida, 1497 A.D. 

X. Progress of Trade, Agriculture, and of Society in the 
Foil rtee nth and Fifteenth Centuries. 

7. Generally the old channels which from time immemorial had been 
used by the ancient Asiatic nations in their commerce with India 
and China, continued to be used by the Western Asiatic nations. By 
the Arab dhows, Egypt, and Syria, and Persia traded with Ceylon, 
and India, and Eastern Africa, and by caravans overland through 
Khorassan and the north of India to China. Constantinople and 
the Eastern Empire were benefited by this trade, which stimulated 
their manufactures and gave them the supply of Europe. There was 
also a caravan trade from the towns on the Black Sea, through Russia 
and Poland, to Scandinavia and Germany. With the Asiatic ports, 
and with Alexandria, the Venetians, Genoese, &c., had direct com- 
munication, and became the importers of the luxuries of the East 
the silks, gems, woollen cloths, muslins, spices, and sugar for the 
use of Europe. The Hanse Towns, from the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries (Lubeck), monopolised the trade of Scandinavia and 
all the lands bordering the Baltic Sea, England, and the west of 
Germany. It had four principal factories, at London, Bruges, Bergen, 
and Novogorod, and eighty of the most considerable cities were 
identified with the League ; the profits of this internal trade, combined 
with a small foreign trade, was very large. The interest of money varied 
from i2jto 20 per cent, the Jews being the usual capitalists, dealing 
mainly in money. In ITALY there were banking establishments in 
Venice, Florence, and Genoa, 1400-1407. The bankers of St. George 
at Genoa were like the old English East India Company, the lords of 
Corsica. Besides Venice, Milan, and Genoa, the old cities, Naples, 

x 



306 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

Amalfi, Bari, Pisa, and Palermo were manufacturing and trading 
towns. The silk manufactory was in Palermo, 1148 A.D., received 
from Constantinople (where it had been introduced by Justinian, 
530 A.D.) SPAIN had manufactories of cloth, silk, arms, plate, glass, 
in Segovia, Toledo, Valentia, Barcelona. GERMANY, besides the 
Hanse Towns and their trade, could boast of NUREMBURG, already 
noticed for its skilful workers, with Augsburg, Spires, Ratisbon, &c., 
cities which in the comforts and elegancies of life excelled Western 
Europe. The NETHERLANDS had carried on linen and woollen 
manufactories at Bruges, Ghent, Ypres, helped greatly by the supplies 
of English wool, from the tenth and eleventh centuries. Merchants 
from seventeen kingdoms had their establishments at Bruges. 
Benkels, who died 1447 A.D., had introduced the art of curing her- 
rings, from which Holland especially had largely benefited. FRANCE 
was prompted by one Jacques Cour to engage in the Levant trade, 
1450 A.D. He had three hundred agents employed in distant 
regions as his factors. Lyons was a trading centre in the fourteenth 
century, greatly increased in following years in importance. The silk 
manufactory was acquired for Milan, 1521 A.D. Marseilles, Nar- 
bonne, Nimes, and Montpellier were also the seats of manufacture 
and trade. In ENGLAND the first great article of export was wool to 
the Netherlands. London was a mere staple of the Hanse Towns ; 
and the customs were in 1329 A.D. farmed by the Bardi 
family of Florence. The woollen manufacture was, to a small extent; 
carried on in the twelfth century ; but, in 1331 A.D., Edward III. 
invited Flemings to settle in England. Commerce attained sufficient 
importance to attract the attention of Richard III. and his parliament. 
A council was appointed at Pisa, 1485 A.D., and at Scio, 1513 A.D. 
The usual jealousy of foreigners began to be felt by the trades, 
and in 1518 A.D. there were riots in London against the foreign 
trader. Considering the difficulty in the way of trade, whether by 
sea or by land, the wonder is that there was so much of both previous 
to the sixteenth century. By SEA, the extent to which piracy was 
carried on is remarkable. While the mercantile cities were allowed 
to make war with each other, and use their shipping as privateers 
against their neighbours on every occasion of difference, unchecked 
by the supreme government of their respective countries, there could 
be little security at sea for unarmed vessels. There were laws of 
navigation, the Consolato, del Mare, in the fourteenth and fifteenth 
centuries, which had been preceded by older rules, 1068 A.D., in 
Barcelona. The Rules d'Oleron are said to have been known to our 
Richard I. in 1197 A.D., but some give 1266 A.D. as the date of their 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 307 

origin. The Ordinances of Wisby, 1450 A.D., are taken from the 
Rules d'Oleron. By LAND, the difficulties were yet more numerous 
and troublesome. The roads, or rather their absence, but such as 
existed, were at times impassable. The tolls levied in every separate 
domain, at the passing of every bridge, and at every market, were not 
only pecuniarily a loss, but implied delay, loss of time, and continual 
friction of temper. Besides these, a large number of the lords of 
petty castles, either by themselves or their agents, plundered the 
travelling merchants. This was especially the case in Germany. 
Yet, in spite of these obstacles, there was, no doubt, a much larger 
trade carried on by the countries of Europe with each other than 
historians have recorded. 

The condition of AGRICULTURE was very low, but occasionally 
prosperous. The great difficulty was in the all but impossibility of 
the carriage of wheat and other grain from the locality where it was 
plentiful to that where it was needed. The comforts of all classes, 
even the highest, were far below those now enjoyed by the ordinary 
middle class in Europe. The bread for the masses was of barley or 
beans, rarely of wheat. In the winter, salt meat or salt fish, the 
drink a very inferior beer (without hops). Clothing, mainly leather 
(not lined), linen, scarce and costly ; the woollens coarse, household 
furniture very scanty, houses chiefly wood, the floors strewed with 
rushes, containing the accumulation of refuse and dirt for weeks ; 
glass only used in the castle of the lord, and removed when his 
residence ceased ; few candles of tallow or wax a late supper in a 
castle would be lighted up by torches held by attendants. Dresses 
of.velvet or brocade were heirlooms, even in ducal families. In 
most houses the work now done by carpenters, joiners, tanners, 
weavers, smiths, was carried on by the servants of the house or the 
family. All these trades were, on a small scale, to be found in the 
cities, as they had been exercised long before in the old .Roman Em- 
pire. Yet, on the whole, in spite of the few luxuries within reach, 
life was more easy than in our day. The change in the value of 
money may be seen in the incomes possessed in the fourteenth cen- 
tury : a yeoman, ^5 yearly; gentlemen, from 10 to -20 ; a 
knight, ^150 ; a labourer, 3d. per day. These sums may be multi- 
plied by twenty or twenty-four to ascertain their purchase power in 
our money. The living was all the cheaper, as the multifarious 
articles of furniture, and other household conveniences, which are 
now deemed necessary, were then out of the question. Chairs, 
tables, beds, chimneys, glass windows, table conveniences &c., were 
rarely seen. 

X 2 



308 From Rudolph of Haps burg, 1273 A.D., to the 



The Contemporary Histories of the several States now follow. 

THE SCANDINAVIAN NATIONS, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, 
remained separate until united under Margaret. Before this was 
accomplished, the nobles in SWEDEN had freed themselves from all 
burdens of taxation, and a code of laws was confirmed by "the Great 
Thing," in 1295 A.D. In DENMARK, under Erick Clipping, the first 
charter was granted, 1282 A.D. In 1320 A.D., a new charter, which 
provides that no taxes be levied without legal sanction. In 1327 A.D., 
a new code of laws. These movements imply the existence of efforts 
towards the settlement of a free constitution ; but the low state of 
intelligence, the difficulties attending the meeting of the " Things," 
through the. limited attendance of the members, naturally threw the 
administration of affairs into a few families, who had interests separate 
from the state. The "Black Death" desolated Scandinavia, 1350 to 
1360 A.D. The condition of the three northern kingdoms, suffer- 
ing from the dissensions of the nobles and from disunion, led to the 
Union of Calmar, under MARGARET, 1397 A.D. "The union was 
one of mere form, its elements were too discordant to harmonise. 
But if this union was not commensurate with the wishes of its framers 
if, instead of lasting for ever, it was dead in little more than a 
century, after an existence continually menaced, the fault is not the 
queen's, or that of the bishops, or that of the great secular officers of 
state who placed their seals to the document, it must be traced to 
the rival interests, and still more to the prejudices, of the three 
peoples ; to the ambition of powerful families, which endeavoured to 
throw off their obedience to the supreme authority ; and, in no little 
degree, to the incompetency of Margaret's successors." * Margaret 
died in her sixtieth year, 1406 A.D. She had ruled by the resources 
of her mind. The peace and prosperity of her rule are the best 
monuments of her greatness. On the whole, whatever her personal 
shortcomings may have been, she may on the whole be pronounced 
one of the greatest sovereigns that ever sat on a throne. 

DENMARK AND NORWAY continued under one sovereign, Erick of 
Pomerania, the nephew of Margaret (married to a daughter of 
Henry IV. of England), lost his crown by his incapacity and folly, 
1439 A.D. Christopher of Pomerania, his nephew, succeeded, 1439- 
1448 A.D. Christian I. of Oldenburg founded the new line of kings. 
He,by the female line, was descended from Erick Clipping. Schleswick 

1 Dunham, " History of Denmark," vol. iii. pp. 5, 6. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D. 309 

and Holstein were united to Denmark, 1459 A.D., but the Shetlands 
and the Orkneys were pawned to Scotland as the dowry of the 
Princess Margaret of Denmark, married to James III. of Scotland, 
1469. This union of Schleswick and Holstein was accompanied by a 
stipulation that the two duchies should never be separated. As 
Holstein was a fief of the empire, this union was, in the end, pro- 
ductive of great injury to Denmark. Christian is the ancestor of the 
kings of Denmark, the old line of Sweden, and of the emperors of 
Russia. Hans succeeded, 1481-1513 A.D. ; he put many nobles to 
death after the battle of Opeio, 1502. His wars with the Ditmarshers 
and the Hanse Towns were unsuccessful. Christian II., 1513-1523 
a man of resolution and cruelty. By his " blood bath," November 8, 
1520 A.D., in which ninety persons, chiefly nobles, were beheaded in 
the market-place of Stockholm as "heretics and rebels," he fairly 
dissolved for ever the Union of Calmar, so far as Sweden was con- 
cerned, through his cruelties. Six hundred eminent persons fell under 
the axe, ninety-four of them under his own eyes. All this w r as after a 
court festival which lasted three days, in which the victims were treated 
with special favour, November 6 : on the 8th, all the gates of Stock- 
holm were closed, loaded cannon planted in the market-place, and 
guards placed on every point of the intersecting streets. The death- 
like silence was broken by the sound of the castle bell, when a long 
procession of victims marched forth to the place of martyrdom .... 
the bodies of the dead lay for two days exposed in the market-place, 
after which they were buried without the city walls. In 1523 A.D., 
Gustavus Vasa, by the help of the Dalecarlian peasantry, drove out 
the Danes, and was crowned King of Sweden. Christian II. (when 
not mad) had some great qualities ; favoured the trading and working 
classes, promoted education, established post-offices and wayside 
inns, and equal weights and measures, and obliged the parishes to 
keep the roads in repair. 

POLAND was united with Lithuania by the marriage of the heiress 
of Poland with Jagellon, Duke of Lithuania, 1386 A.D. For a brief 
period both HUNGARY and POLAND, 1439-1444 A.D., were under one 
.sovereign, and Lithuana was frequently practically independent, but 
under Sigismund I., 1509 A.D., Poland, with Lithuania and West 
Prussia, Massona and Livonia, extended from the Black to the 
Baltic Sea. 

PRUSSIA was conquered and its barbarous people placed under 
strict tyrannical rule by the TEUTONIC KNIGHTS united with the 
Order of the Swords, 1237 A.D., after above fifty years' labour, 
1283; they had been invited to assist the Poles. The seat of the 



310 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D. y to the 

order was at Marienburg, 1309 A.D.; their history is one of wars 
with Poland, Denmark, and with their own vassals. In 1410 A.D. 
they were routed at Tanneburg, and in 1466 A.D., by the treaty of 
Thorn, West Prussia was ceded to Poland, and East Prussia held as 
a fief. At the close of the fourteenth century they possessed between 
the Oder and the Gulf of Finland fifty-five towns and forty-eight 
fortified castles. In their last war with Poland three hundred and 
fifty thousand lives are said to have fallen. The seat of the Order 
was removed to Konigsberg, 1451-1466 A.D. Albert of Branden- 
burg, grand master in 1525 A.D., became a Protestant, and received 
Prussia as an hereditary duchy, a fief of Poland. 

RUSSIA and TURKEY ; their respective histories have been already 
noted. In TURKEY, the Sultan, Bajazet II., succeeded Mahomet II.; 
then Selim, 1512-1520 A.D., who conquered Egypt from the Mame- 
lukes and was acknowledged as suzerain by all the Mahometan 
rulers of North Africa. In Egypt Selim found Mahomet the 
twelfth khalif of the house of Abbas, which had found a refuge in 
Egypt, and had remained in privacy since the taking of Bagdad by 
the Seljuks, 1258 A.D. He induced him solemnly to transfer the 
Khalifat to the Sultan of the Ottoman Turks and his successors. At 
the same time Selim took possession of the insignia of that office, 
which the Abbassides had retained, i.e., the sacred standard, the 
sword, and the mantle of the Prophet. 1 One half of the Mussul- 
man world does not recognise the Turkish Khalif. 2 The defeat of 
Solymari's attempt to take Vienna, October 14, 1529, "is an epoch 
in the history of the world. The tide of Turkish conquest in 
Central Europe had now set its mark. The wave once again dashed 
so far, but only to be again broken and recede for ever." 3 

ITALY expected great things from the reign of Henry VII., the 
.Emperor of the House of Luxemburg. His election was a check 
to the ambition of Philip le Bel of France ; he was just, pious, and 
popular. In a Diet at Spires, 1309 A.D., he had declared his 
determination to assist the Ghibelline and assert the Imperial 
rights in Italy. He was in a fair way towards accomplishing his 
purposes, when he died suddenly at Buonconvento, August 24th, 
I 3 I 3- There is an interest connected with this name as the ideal 
sovereign of Dante's treatise, " De Monarchia." * To Dante he 
was "the Roman law impersonated in the emperor, a monarch 
who should leave all the nations, all the free Italian cities, in 

1 Creasy, p. 150. 

8 See Principal Fairbairn in Contemporary Review, Dec., 1882, pp. 876, 877. 

3 Creasy, p. 170. 4 Milman, vol. v. pp. 391-394. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 311 

possession of their rights and old municipal institutions." On his 
death Italy fell back to its old anarchy. Rienzi, an eloquent and 
popular leader of the Roman people, endeavoured to establish a 
republic and dictatorship, 1347-1349 A.D., and again 1353, 1354, 
when he was killed. The Italian republic soon realised the diffi- 
culties of all mere municipal governments, free from the restraints 
of a common general authority. In all the cities the peace was 
disturbed by the feuds and turbulence of the nobles ; the masses of 
the population were divided by their guilds and trading corpora- 
tions, and by the political rivalries of the Guelf (the Republicans), 
and the (Ghibelline), the Imperialists. The cities elected podestas, 
(chief magistrates), and formed an armed and disciplined militia. There 
was for a time great material prosperity ; agriculture was improved 
by the demand for produce from the populous cities ; the cities 
enlarged their walls and fortifications ; manufactures nourished ; all 
the great buildings which now command the admiration of foreigners 
were erected during this period ; canals for irrigation were formed in 
Lombardy, 1179-1257 A.D. The merchants of Lombardy and 
Tuscany, through Venice and Genoa, traded with different countries 
by sea, and by land through Germany and France with the rest of 
Europe. Unfortunately all these republics were engaged in almost 
continual warfare among themselves, which was generally carried on 
by bands of mercenaries, " condottieri," 1339 A.D., headed by able 
leaders, who were ready to sell their services to the highest bidder : 
the larger republics, Genoa, Pisa, Florence, and Venice, had wars 
for rivalry in trade. Venice with Genoa, from 1256-1381 A.D., for 
the trade of the Black Sea. Genoa with Pisa, two hundred years, 
for the suzerainty of Corsica and Sardinia. The cities were all of 
them, from time to time, troubled by the assumption of supreme 
power by the podestas, or by noble powerful families. Eccelino di- 
Romeno tyrannised over Verona, Vicenza, and Padua, 1250-1226, 
until put down by a league of Ferrara, Mantua, and Bologna, 
headed by Pope Alexander IV. In 1311, 1312 A.D., the Scala 
family were lords of Verona; the Carrara family at Padua, 
1380-1406 A.D. ; the D'Este at Ferrara, 1317-1548 A.D. ; the 
Gonzanga at Mantua. At Florence, the Duke of Athens, 1342, 1343 ; 
then the Medici, 1430-1529 ; the De la Torres and Visconti and 
Sforza, in Milan, 1259-1447 A.D. The Marquisate of Montferrat 
was under its active rulers. Venice provoked the League of Cambray, 
comprising the Pope, the Emperor, France, and Spain, 1508-1511, 
through jealousy of her enlarged territory, which she had managed 
to acquire between 1404 A.D. and 1453 A.D., on the mainland 



312 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

of Italy, which, together with her wealth and maritime power, 
excited the jealousy of her neighbours. Venice lost at once her 
continental territories, but soon recovered them when the leaguers 
broke up the League. Venice had its trials from the treason of 
its rulers, and had to execute its Doge, Marino Faliero, guilty of a 
conspiracy against the council, 1355 A.D. The nobles in the papal 
territory put down by Borgia, 1495 A.D. 

In NAPLES and SICILY, Charles of Anjou, after the death of 
Conraddin, was master of Naples and Sicily, 1263 A.D. Sicily, by 
the revolution, accompanied by the massacre called the Italian 
Vespers, 1282 A.D., became a separate kingdom under the heirs of 
Conraddin, the kings of Arragon. Alphonso V., of Arragon, united 
Naples and Sicily, 1443 A.D. Ferdinand IV. succeeded, 1458 A.D. ; 
Alphonso, 1494 A.D.; Ferdinand II., 1496 A.D. Frederick, his 
successor, applied to Ferdinand of Arragon and Castile, for help 
against Louis XII. of France, but both Ferdinand and Louis agreed 
to divide Naples and Sicily between them. Charles VIII. of France, 
in his Italian expedition, conquered Naples ; but on his retreat the 
Spanish troops, under Gonzalvo de Cordova, conquered Naples and 
Sicily, which thus formed part of the inheritance of Charles I. of 
Spain and V. of Germany. SAVOY became a duchy under 
Amadeus VIII. Piedmont was annexed 1418 A.D. ; and Nice, 
1419 A.D. 

The second great MONGOLIAN (Tartar) irruption under TAMERLANE, 
a descendant of Ghengis Khan, 1369-1405 A.D., swept away a large 
portion of the khanate of Kipshack, and thus aided the attempts 
of the Russian Czars to throw off the Tartar yoke, while, by the 
defeat and captivity of Bajazet, the TURKISH sultan, 1402 A.D., the 
GREEK BYZANTINE EMPIRE was saved and its existence prolonged 
for about half a century. All the khanates of Zagetai, and that of 
Persia under the Ilkanian dynasty, were divided into petty tributary 
states ; India also was conquered as far as Delhi, which city was 
taken and one hundred thousand persons massacred. The Greek 
Empire paid tribute, and Tamerlane's empire extended from the 
Irtish and Volga to the Persian Gulf, and from the Ganges to the 
Bosphorus and the Mediterranean. On the throne raised at 
Samarcand he gave audience and issued his commands to ambassa- 
dors from Egypt, Arabia, Russia, Spain, and the remote Khans of 
Tartary. Desirous of atoning for the Mahometan blood which had 
been shed in his conquests, he determined to destroy the idolatries 
of China. Crossing the Jaxertes when frozen (March, 1405 A.D.), 
he died, in the seventieth year of his age, at a village seventy-six 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 313 

leagues from Samarcand. His empire fell to pieces in the quarrels 
of his sons ; Khorassan to one of his family. The white and 
black Turcomans ruled over the eastern provinces of what is now 
called Turkey in Asia. Syria fell to its old masters, the Mamelukes 
of Egypt, and Asia Minor to the Ottoman Turks under the 
successor of Bajazet. The contests between these pastoral tribes 
and the Turks and Mamelukes, made Asia, from the Euphrates to 
the Indus, the theatre of rapine and murder for nearly a century 
after the death of Tamerlane, until the settlement of a government 
in Persia. 

PERSIA. In 1502 A.D. Ismael Shah founded the Sefi or Seffanian 
J )ynasty. Being the descendant of Ali, the son-in-law of Mahomet, 
he was consequently a Shite or Sheah, the heterodox Mahometan 
.sect, while the Ottoman Turks were of the Sooni, orthodox sect. 
He drove out the Turcoman tribes and founded the modern king- 
dom of Persia, 1502 A.D. From the red cap, the distinctive head- 
dress of the people, the Persians received the name of Kuzzil-bash 
(Red Head). Ishmael Shah was fully employed in reducing the 
wandering nomads to subjection, and in wars with the Sultan of 
Turkey: he died 1523 A.D., and was succeeded by his son Tamasup. 

INDIA. The last of the Slave Dynasties in Delhi ended 1414 A.D.; 
but before this the Moguls under Tamerlane had invaded India 
1398 A.D., took and plundered Delhi, followed by the slaughter 
already recorded, and advanced as far as the Ganges, and then 
.suddenly left the country. After 1414 A.D., there was, from the 
quarrels of the petty princes, a very unsettled state of affairs and no 
power to resist invasion from without. Shah Baber, a descendant 
in the direct line from Ghengis Khan, and by his mother from 
Tamerlane, ruled over one of the petty states near Bokhara 
and Samarcand. After uniting these under his own government, he 
invaded India in five expeditions, in the last of which, 1525 A.D., 
he won the battle of Paniput, 1526 A.D. At that time there were 
five Mahometan states, which had arisen out of the preceding 
Mahometan dynasties. There were two important native pagan 
.states, besides many others, not as yet brought in contact with the 
Mahometans. Baber fully established the Mogul Empire in India, 
and died at Agra, 1530 A.D.. Before his invasion the Portuguese 
made their appearance under Vasco de Gama at Calicut, 28th May, 
1498. Albuquerque, 1496-1509 A.D., founded Goa, and began to 
establish the Portuguese power in India. 

CHINA. In 1368 A.D., the Mogul dynasty of the race of Ghengis 
Khan were expelled from China by Choo Yan Chang, the son of a 



3 H From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

labourer, who founded the Ming Dynasty, under which the empire 
was in a disturbed condition, though Tartary was subjugated, at least, 
nominally. The capital was removed from Nanking to Pekin, pro- 
bably to secure the northern frontier more readily from invasion. 
Cochin China and Tonquin were conquered and held for a brief 
period. 

JAPAN was disturbed by civil wars, and from 1336 A.D. had two 
dynasties, one in the south, the other in the north. An invasion by 
the Mogul Tartars was repelled, 1281 A.D. 

THE TRADE with foreign lands in this period was promoted by 
embassies from the Pope to China and the Great Khan of 
Tartary one John Corvina, a Franciscan, resided at Pekin as Arch- 
bishop, 1300-1328 A.D., and there was a trade overland until the 
expulsion of the Moguls from China in 1368 A.D. A Franciscan, 
sent by Pope Benedict XII. to the Great Khan, resided at Pekin, 
1342-1346 A.D., as legate; the traders reached the remote East vi& 
Azoph, Astrachan, Khiva, &C. 1 Sir John Mandeville travelled in 
Palestine and the East, 1357-1371 A.D. The cities of Italy, the 
Hanseatic towns, and those of the Netherlands engrossed the trade 
of Europe. The Venetians, Genoese, and the Florentines were 
masters of the trade of the Levant. The Italian merchants, known 
as Lombards, were most influential in monetary affairs, as banking, 
and are supposed to have first invented bills of exchange. Manu- 
factures of silk passed from Greece into Sicily, Italy, and at last to 
Venice. Ghent, Bruges, Antwerp, and other towns in the Nether- 
lands were famous for their manufactures of cloth, camlets, and 
drapery. The Hanseatic League declined from the beginning of the 
fifteenth century, through the jealousy of the Danes, the English 
and the Dutch ; and especially through the increased facilities for 
inter-communication which arose in the fifteenth century, and which 
allowed more scope for rivalry in trade by Germany, Italy, Holland, 
and England. 

8. THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of this period is of great in- 
terest. It is a chronicle of the attempt at reform in the Romish 
Church by the general councils, and of the decline of the papal 
power which preceded the open outbreak against the papacy and 
the teachings of the papal Church, by Martin Luther, which led to 
the Reformation. 

The Popes and the Councils. Boniface VIII., whose quarrel with 
Philip le Bel has been narrated, celebrated for the first time the 

1 Encyc. Brit,, ninth edition, " China." 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany \ 1520 A.D. 315 

jubilee for 1300 A.D. at Rome. On this occasion "he showed him- 
self to the crowding pilgrims seated on the throne of Constantine, 
arrayed with sword, crown, and sceptre, shouting aloud, ' I am 
Caesar ! I am Emperor !' ;J1 The States-General, in its three orders, 
supported Philip and remonstrated w r ith the Pope ; the friends of 
Philip seized the Pope at Arragon, and held him in prison a shuDrt 
time. He died soon after, aged eighty-six. This Pope added a 
second crown to the tiara (the first having been added by Hormisdas, 
514 (523) A.D. The next Pope but one, Clement V., under the 
influence of Philip le Bel, removed the papal Court to Avignon^ 
where it remained until 1377 A.D. An inquiry into the character of 
Boniface VIII., necessitated by a charge of heresy and of sundry 
atrocious crimes (preferred by Philip le Bel), was held in Avignon, 
1310 A.D., by this Clement. Philip was at length persuaded to drop 
the prosecution, to the great relief of Clement. "This Boniface 
was a man of learning and capacity, but he was incapable of com- 
prehending or allowing for those changes in the state of political 
affairs which rendered a corresponding change at least, in tone 
and temper indispensable to the maintenance of his influence." 2 
John XX. or XXII., 1316-1344 A.D., added the third crown to the 
tiara. Gregory XI., urged by St. Catherine of Sienna, took back 
the papal chair to Rome, 1377 A.D., and died, 1378 A.D. Then 
began the great schism after the election of Urban VI. at Rome, by 
a counter election at Avignon of Clement. Two councils were called 
to correct this great evil to Christendom that of Pisa, 1409 A.D., and 
that at Constance, 1414-1418 A.D. In this latter council, the two 
rival popes being removed after much negotiation and trickery on 
all sides, Pope MARTIN V. was chosen, the sole and only legal occu- 
pant of the papal see. But, in choosing a Pope, the intentions of 
the council to reform abuses were nullified, as the newly-elected 
Pope continued all the evils of which the council had complained. 
' " It was Martin V. who established the principle and sowed the 

seed which was to be developed into Ultramontanism The 

Pope claimed to be the universal ordinary; the bishops of the 
national Churches, only acting as his delegates, were to obey his 
orders ; hence we shall find from this time the continual appointment 
of legates a latere to control the metropolitans." 3 The Council of 
BASLE, 1431 A.D., which continued by adjournment several years, 

1 Bryce. 2 Greenwood, vol. vi. pp. 348, 349. 

3 Dr. Hook, "Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury," vol. v. pp. 88-90; 
Dean Milman, "Latin Christianity," vol. viii. pp. 312-315. 



316 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

was called in the hope of imposing checks on the papal power, and 
of establishing the doctrine of the superiority of general councils to 
the Pope. In this, as in the previous councils, the opponents of the 
papal authority were fairly beaten by the persevering astuteness of 
the popes. For a short time there were two councils and two popes 
at . once. The Council of Basle, having passed various decrees 
asserting its superiority, 1434 A.D., was dissolved by the Pope, but 
continued its sittings. In 1437 A.D., the Pope called a new council 
at FERRARA, which was removed to FLORENCE in 1439 A - D -> an d 
to Rome, 1442 A.D. At the Council of Florence the doctrine of 
purgatory was declared to be that of the Church. The election of 
Nicholas V. gave outward peace to the Church, 1447 A.D. He was 
a lover and patron of literature. The Council of BASLE, which had 
removed to Lausanne, acknowledged him and dissolved, 1449 A.D. 
Nicholas V. died broken-hearted when he heard of the loss of Con- 
stantinople to the Turks, 1455 A.D., the only potentate (to his credit 
be it recorded) who testified any deep feeling for this disgrace to 
Christendom. ^Eneas Sylvius (Piccolomini) was elected Pope under 
the title of Pius II., 1458 A.D., having retracted all his liberal 
opinions advanced in the Council of Basle. We condone the ter- 
giversation of this wily ecclesiastical politician when we read that, in 
his deep concern for the interests of Christendom, he was ready to 
risk his own person in the crusade against the Turks, and died at 
Ancona, 1464 A.D., while superintending the preparations of the 
Venetian fleet. Sixtus IV., who began his popedom 1471 A.D., 
scandalised the Church by his nepotism. So also Innocent VIII., 
his successor, 1484-1492 A.D. Alexander VI. (Borgia), 1492-1503, 
the most disgraceful of the popes, made the name of Borgia 
a byword of infamy. His abominable vices, poisonings, murders, 
and treacheries, partly to benefit his illegitimate children, no one 
denies. If it be possible to add any additional infamy to his 
character, it is found in the fact that he and Alphonso, king ot 
Naples, applied to Bajazet II., Sultan of Turkey, for assistance 
against the invasion of Naples by Charles VIII. of France, stating 
that Charles looked on Naples as a mere stepping-stone towards 
Constantinople. He was poisoned by unwittingly partaking of food 
which had been prepared for a rich cardinal whose property was 
needed for the Borgias, 1503 A.D. We need not wonder that in the 
reign of this Pope the monk Savonarola, at Florence, a great reformer, 

1 Gascoigne, quoted by Robertson, " History of Christianity," vol. viii. I2mo. 
P- 247- 



Emperor Charles V of Germany, 1520 A.D. 317 

1490-1498 A.D., but was at last burnt alive, 23rd May, 1498 A.U. 
Julius II. was more of a general than a Pope. His desire was 
to free Italy from all foreign princes and rulers. He took back 
Romagna from the Borgias, was engaged in the League of Cambray 
against Venice, and held the nineteenth Lateran Council^ which 
decided sundry matters of discipline, 1512 A.D. Leo X. (Medici) 
was elected in 1513 A. D., through the influence of his family at 
Florence. His patronage of literature, his indifference to all religion, 
and his love of pleasure, the characteristics of the period of " the 
Renaissance," make him, to this day, a favourite of a large class of 
literary men who are like-minded. Adrian, his successor, endea- 
voured to reform the papal court, and restore decency and the 
appearance of morality at least, 1522, 1523 A.D. Clement VII. 
succeeded, 1523 A.D., and ruled until 1534 A.D. 

The resistance to some of the teachings of the Romish Church 
on Scriptural grounds was maintained by the WALDENSES, who, per- 
secuted in Spain and the south of France, had found a refuge in 
the valleys of Piedmont, 1448-1452 A.D., and there were called the 
VAUDOIS. JOHN WYCLIFFE, the English reformer, 1374-1384 A.D., 
had translated the Bible into the English vernacular, and his nume- 
rous treatises, in which he opposed the popular teaching of the 
Romish Church, had been freely circulated in Germany, and had 
been the means of arousing the action of JOHN Huss and JEROME 
OF PRAGUE, in resistance to the corruptions of the Church. Although 
the Emperor Sigismund had guaranteed the safety of Huss, both 
he and Jerome were condemned and burnt by the COUNCIL OF 
CONSTANCE, 1415, 1416 A.D. Huss was no heretic in the eccle- 
sistical sense of the term. He held all the dogmas of the Roman 
Catholic Church, and was unquestionably as orthodox as those who 
burnt him. He was a martyr to the power of the hierarchy, pro- 
voked by his testimony against ecclesiastical wealth and power. The 
friends of Huss and Jerome, enraged at the breach of faith on the 
part of Sigismund and the council, raised a rebellion under one 
Ziska, which lasted for several years. In England the followers of 
WicklifTe were called LOLLARDS. For some time they were protected 
by some of the leading barons, as John of Gaunt, &c., but on the 
accession of Henry IV., whose interests led him to propitiate the 
clergy, they were persecuted. The statute, " de heretico comburendo," 
was passed. William Sawtre, a parish priest, was the first martyr to 
Protestantism in England, 1402 A.D. ; and, under Henry V. Sir 
John Oldcastle (Lord Cobham) was burnt, in 1418 A.D. In imitation 
of the action of the Inquisition in the south of France against the 



318 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

Albigenses (in the beginning of the thirteenth century), the Inqui 
sition was established in Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella in 1480, 
and similar courts under various names in all papal Europe, 
though generally viewed with jealousy by the secular power. Yet 
there w^s then, and there has ever been, much real piety existing in 
the Romish Church, to which various Protestants have delighted to 
bear witness, among others John Wesley. 1 There was also a strong 
feeling of repugnance against the abuses and superstitions of the 
Church, especially against the sale of indulgences by papal agents 
in Germany. The " MYSTICS," some of whom may be called 
"reformers before Luther in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries," 
were men of undoubted and singular piety. The names of Tauler, 
Ruysbrock, Gerhard, Groote, John Wessel, Thomas a Kempis, some 
of whom were members of the society of " the Brethren of Common 
Life " at Deventer, deserve to be remembered by all Christians. 
Among every class of the clergy were found men truly Christian, 
and fully alive to the evils prevalent in the Church. They were 
deterred from open opposition, because of their dread of breaking 
the formal unity of the Church under the popedom, which they 
regarded as essential to the existence of the Church. The " Imita- 
tion of Christ," attributed to Thomas a Kempis, supplied some 
imperious want in the Christianity of mankind. ". . . . Its sole, 
single, exclusive object is the purification of the individual soul. 
.... That which distinguishes Christianity, &c., the love of man, 
is entirely left out." 3 The dean forgets that the book was intended 
as a guide to help the individual to deal faithfully with his own soul 
in the work of self-examination. It was not intended to discuss 
relative or other duties, but to enable the pious soul to attain that 
purity of heart through which such duties can be discharged. 

9. LITERARY HISTORY FROM 1273-1520 A.D. Two of the great 
scholastic doctors, mentioned in connexion with the scholastic philo- 
sophy, properly belong to this period. Duns Scotus, 1275-1308 A.D., 
and William of Ockham, 1270-1350 A.D. The first, Duns Scotus, 
" might seem a mere reasoning machine .... logic worship is the 
key of his whole philosophy." 3 William Ockham was a political 
fanatic, advocating the rights of the state against the Church, and 
was excommunicated by Pope John XXII., 1330 A.D. ; "by his 
strong, rigid Nominalism .... he may seem to have anticipated 
the famous axiom of Leibnitz, that ' there is nothing in the intellect, 
which was not from the sense, except the intellect itself,' and to have 

1 Works, vol. ii. p. 77 ; iii. p. 342. 2 Milman, vol. vi. p. 484. 3 Ibid., p. 467. 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 319 

taken the same ground as Kant." 1 GERSON, the Chancellor of the 
University of Paris, 1393-1410 A.D., the great advocate of the rights 
of the state and of the councils against the claims of the popes, has 
been associated with the later Schoolmen. There are also a few 
names which properly belong to the universal literature of the 
Church rather than to any particular nation. Cardinal Hugo St. 
Cher, 1225-1265 A.D., gave to the Church a Bible with various 
readings, a commentary (Postilla), and a concordance of the Latin 
Bible. NICHOLAS DE LYRA, 1291-1340 A.D., wrote " Postilla," the 
first ever printed, 1472 A.D., from which Martin Luther so largely 
profited, that it was said : " Si lyra non lyrasset, Lutherus non 
saltasset." Bradwardine, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1325-1348 A.D., 
a strong Augustinian theologian. WYCLTFFE, 1374-1384 A.D., who 
translated the Bible into English, and wrote a large number of 
treatises which had no small influence in promoting the feeling 
against the corruptions of the Church. Laurentius Valla, a great 
classical authority, wrote (1465 A.D.) "Annotations on the New 
Testament," and Cardinal Ximenes, in Spain, patronised the great 
work, the " Complutensian Polyglote," 1482-1517 A.D. The revival 
of letters, to which the impulse was at all events accelerated by the 
influx of learned Greeks into ITALY, &c., some time before, and 
especially after the conquest of Constantinople (1453 A.D.) by the 
Turks, was felt at once in the increased study of Greek. Boccaccio 
had revived the study, 1350-1370 A.D., and Chrysoloras had taught in 
Florence, 1400-1415 A.D. ; LORENZO DE MEDICI founded an academy 
for its study, 1470 A.D. ; at Paris it was studied (1458 A.D.) in the 
University ; in ENGLAND taught by Linacre and Grocyn at Oxford, 
1480-1491 A.D. ; but this study was generally opposed by the 
schools and universities, and its introduction and continuance as a 
study was owing to the secular authorities. Meanwhile, instead of 
one literary language (the Latin) with which the clergy and the 
leading laymen were more or less familiar, the vernacular languages 
began to be used as vehicles of thought. The ITALIAN, FRENCH, 
SPANISH, ENGLISH, GERMAN, DUTCH, and the PORTUGUESE, in all 
seven languages, had begun separate national literatures. 

ITALY. PETRARCH, the lover of Laura, celebrated in his sonnets, 
1306-1374 A.D. ; DANTE, 1265-1322 A.D., in his "Divine Comedy," 
gave to modern literature a new beginning and fresh starting-point 
distinct from the classics (Olifant); BOCCACCIO, 1313-1375 A.D., whose 
pure Italian is no excuse for his coarseness and indecency ; Poggio, 

1 Milman, vol. vi. p. 474. 



320 From Rudolph of Hapsburg, 1273 A.D., to the 

1410-1459 A.D. ; Picus of Morandola, 1485-1494 A.D. Under the 
patronage of the Medici in Florence, 1470-1492 A.D. and following 
year, literature flourished at Florence. Cardinal Bembo, 1490- 
1540 A.D. ; Politian, 1480-1490' A.D. ; Pulci, 1481 A.D. ; Boiardo, 
1495 A.D. ; ARIOSTO, 1503-1516 A.D. ; were the fruits of the Renais- 
sance. Ficennius, in 1482 A.D., published his "Platonic Theology," 
in which the soul, an emanation from God, is taught to be reunited 
to him by aesceticism and contemplation. There was also Peter 
Martyr (Anghiera), 1427-1500 A.D., the first literary announcer of 
the new discoveries of the Spaniards. From the eleventh century 
PAINTING began to be pursued in ITALY, and created the Bolognese, 
Sienese, Tuscan, Umbrian, Paduan, Roman, Venetian, &c., schools. 
LEONARDO DA VINCI, the most celebrated, 1452-1470 A.D. Italian 
literature was the favourite foreign literature of the educated nobles 
and ladies in England in this period. 

FRANCE had writers, but no literature comparable with Italy at 
this time. FROISSART, the chronicler, 1401 A.D., and PHILIP DE 
COMINES, 1468-1579 A.D., are her leading writers. Raymond 
Sebonde wrote a philosophical defence of natural and revealed 
religion, 1430 A.D. Budasus, 1467-1540 A.D., belongs to the next 
period. 

SPAIN could boast of the famous romance " Amadis de Gaul," 
in the fourteenth century, besides many theologians and writers 
of mere chronicles. The poem on the Cid was in existence in 
the fourteenth century, but was not well known until much later. 
Le Brixa became to Spain what Budaeus was to France and Erasmus 
to Germany ; he was the reviver of classical and Oriental literature, 
1473 A - D ' Popular songs were known in Spain and Portugal from 
an early period. 

ENGLAND. The English language was taught in the schools, 
1350 A.D., and in courts of law, 1368 A.D. It was first used in a 
proclamation issued by Henry III. in 1258 A.D. The first English 
letter extant is by a lady, 1399 A.D., "proved to be genuine by the 
badness of the grammar." The long poem, " Piers Ploughman," 
by Robert Langland, a monk, 1362 A.D. GOWER the poet, 1354- 
1398 A.D. ; CHAUCER, whose "Canterbury Tales" (1328-1400 A.D.) 
are read now with increasing pleasure; the PASTON Letters, 1420- 
1480 A.D., faithfully depict the then state of society. The poet 
Lydgate, 1461 A.D. ; Linacre the physician, 1460-1521 A.D., a great 
friend and promoter of literature ; Dean COLET of St. Paul's, with 
Bishop Fisher, and Sir THOMAS MORE, who wrote "THE UTOPIA," 
1516 A.D., were contemporary with Henry VIII. and Cardinal 



Emperor Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A. D. 321 

Wolsey. " The Utopia " is an ideal picture of a perfect common- 
wealth never to be realised. Hawes, 1515 A.D., and Skelton, 
1460-1528 A.D., were later poets. Other chroniclers also, as Thomas 
of Walsingham, 1440 A.D., Hardyng, 1450 A.D., and Fabyan, 
1500 A.D., with Lord Berners, the translator of Froissart, and the 
lawyer, Sir J. Fortesque, 1450 A.D., and Thomas Lyttleton, 1460- 
1487 A.D. Scotland had King James I., 1395-1437 A.D. ; Fordun, 
1300-1386 A.D. ; Andrew of Wyntown (Chronicler of Scotland), 
1400 A.D. ; Harry the Minstrel, at the court of James IV., 1410 A.D. 
GERMANY owes much to the school of Deventer (Overyssel, 
Holland), planned by Gerhard Groot, but not established until 
fifteen years after his death, 1400 A.D. The associates of this school 
were called "the Brethren of the Common Life," resembling the 
Moravians by their strict life, by a partial community of goods, by 
industry in manual labour, and by their fervent devotion ; they were 
also distinguished by their love of learning and their efforts to dis- 
seminate it. Eichhorn says that " these schools were the first genuine 
nurseries of literature in Germany . . . and in them was, first, tauught 
the Latin, and, in process of time, the Greek and Eastern tongues." 
THOMAS A KEMPIS, the supposed author of " The Imitation of Christ," 
1380-1471 A.D., was of this pious fraternity. It is now thought that 
a monk named SCHOMHOVEN, of Zwolle, who lived thirty years before 
Kempis, was the author. Rudolf Agricola, Von Langen, Hegius, 
Wimpheling, the Abbot Tethem, Dr. J. Eck, the opponent of Luther, 
a man of real learning, and many others, were connected in early 
life with this college. HANS SACHS, the Nuremburg poet, 
1497-1576 A.D., and SEBASTIAN BRANDT, 1454-1521 A.D., in his 
" Ship of Fools," appealed to the people. REUCHLIN, the reviver 
of Hebrew and Oriental literature, 1455-1520 A.D., was persecuted 
by the ignorant clergy and others, but protected by the secular power ; 
he defended himself in a publication the most severe and telling of 
all satires, judging from its results on the mind and opinions of 
Germany. The "Epistolse Obscurorum Virorum," by unknown 
hands, " fell among the opponents of Reuchlin like a bombshell, 

scattering dismay The enemies of the new literature are 

made to represent themselves, and the representation is managed 
with a truth of nature only equalled by the absurdity of the posture 
in which the actors are exhibited." The result was a radical reform 
in the universities of Germany. ULRIC VON HUTTON, Crotus Rabianus, 
Hermann Buschius, were the three authors of this effective satire. 1 

1 Sir William Hamilton's " Essays," 8vo. 
Y 



322 State of the World A.D. 1520. 

. THE NETHERLANDS, HOLLAND. From an early period the Low 
Countries had their national songs. John I., Duke of Brabant, was 
the first lyric writer; Jacob von Maerlandt (Bruges), 1263-1270 A.D. ; 
the Rhyming Bible, 1270 to 1291 A.D. ; Jan von Boendale, poetry, 
1286-1365 A.D. ; Melis Stoke, rhyming chronicler, 1305 A.D. ; Dirk 
Potter, poet and diplomatist, 1409-1412 A.D. ; Ruysbrock, a religious 
writer, 1294-1310 A.D. Theatrical companies for mysteries and 
miracle plays existed in the twelfth to fourteenth centuries, and 
preceded the Chamber of Rhetoric in the fifteenth and sixteenth 
centuries. There were also Tournaments of Rhetoric at Antwerp 
and Brussels, 1426-1620 A.D. 

It is remarkable that the largest library .in Europe in this period 
was one in BUDA, HUNGARY, collected by the king, Matthias 
Corvinus, 1458-1490 A.D. It contained 50,000 volumes, but it was 
dispersed and lost in the conquest of Hungary by the Turks. 

State of the World 1520 A.D. 

EUROPE. 

SCANDINAVIA united by the Union of Calmar. Sweden discontented 
and prepared to separate. 

BRITISH ISLANDS. England and Ireland, with Wales, form one 
kingdom. Scotland under its own king. 

FRANCE. All the fiefs reunited to the Crown (Lorraine and part ot 
Burgundy excepted, which yet belonged to the German 
Empire). 

SPAIN. All the peninsula (except Portugal) united under one king, 
Charles I. of Spain, the fifth of Germany. 

PORTUGAL, distinguished by its maritime discoveries under Prince 
Henry, 1412-1463 A.D. 

THE NETHERLANDS (Belgium and Holland) attached to the empire 
of Charles V. (as the heir of Mary of Burgundy). 

ITALY. Savoy and Piedmont form a Duchy the States of the 
Church to the Pope. Florence and Milan under their 
respective dukes. Genoa and Venice were under republics. 
Venice had 3,300 merchant ships and 25,000 seamen. 



State of the World A. D. 1520. 323 

Florence had 150,000 inhabitants and a revenue of .150,000. 
Naples and Sicily formed part of the Spanish kingdom under 
Charles V. 

GERMANY. The empire under Charles V. consisting of a large 
number of independent principalities, duchies, electorates, 
and free towns. 

BOHEMIA to the House of Austria, after the death of King Louis at 
Mohacz in the battle with the Turks, 1526 A.D. 

HUNGARY united to the House of Austria by Albert II., 1437 A.D. ; 
after his death to Ladislaus, King of Poland, who was killed 
at Varna by the TURKS, 1443 A.D. It was then governed by 
the great Hunyades, 1445-1448 A.D., and then by his son 
Matthias Corvinus, 1458-1490 A.D., as regents, who resolutely 
defended the country against the TURKS. This was the most 
brilliant period of Hungarian history. Ladislaus II. reigned 
1490-1516 A.D., and was succeeded by Louis II., 1516 A.D., 
who was, with difficulty, able to resist the TURKISH invasion. 

PRUSSIA, under the Teutonic knights, whose master was Albert of 
Brandenburg, 1511 A.D., engaged in a war with Poland. 

SWITZERLAND. Independent and aristocratic republics, too ready 
to hire out their enterprising youth as mercenary troops to 
any European power. 

POLAND and Lithuania united under the Jagellons since 1386 A.D. ; 
wars with Russia until the peace of 1523 A.D. 

RUSSIA became independent of the Khan of Kipshack, 1478 A.D. ; 
its power was being consolidated and extended, though 
occasionally ravaged by the Tartars of Kazan and the 
Crimea. 

TURKEY. The Ottoman Turks first had a footing in Europe, 1356 A.D., 
and in 1453 A.D. conquered Constantinople and destroyed 
the Greek Eastern Empire, absorbing also Servia, Wallachia, 
and Moldavia, 

ASIA. 

ASIA MINOR, SYRIA, and the territory west of the Tigris form part of 
the Turkish Empire. 

PERSIA, east of the Tigris, &c., under the Sefi rule. 

Y 2 



324 State of the World A.D. 1520. 

INDIA, the beginning of the Mogul Empire by Baber, 1509-1526 A.D., 
which gradually acquired the whole rule of India. 

CHINA under the Ming Dynasty. 
JAPAN disturbed by civil wars. 

AFRICA. 

EGYPT under the Mamelukes, 1250 A.D. ; conquered by Selim, 
Sultan of Turkey, 1527 A.D. 

MOROCCO. The Merins supplanted by the Oatzes, then by the 
Xeriffs, 1510-1519 A.D. 

TUNIS. The Lazzis submit to Turkey, 1514 A.D. All Barbary 
nominally subject to Turkey, except Morocco. Piracy is 
specially located at ALGIERS, and troubled the Mediterranean 
before the end of the fifteenth century. The Corsairs were 
not seen in the Atlantic until the year 1585 A.D. 

AMERICA. 

Was first discovered 'by Columbus, in the service of Spain, 1492 A.D. 
First Spanish colony at Hispaniola, 1493" A - D - J at Cuba, 
1511 A.D. 

MEXICO conquered by Cortez for Spain, i52ofA.D. 
BRAZIL discovered by Cabral, the Portuguese, 1500 A.D. 

SOUTH AMERICA. Magellan discovered the Straits called by his 
name, and passed 'on to the Philippine Islands; his vessel 
made the first circumnavigation of the world, 1520, 1521 A. D. 



TENTH PERIOD, 



From the Reign of Charles V. of Germany, 
1520 A.D., to the English Revolution, 
1688 A.D. 



1. MODERN HISTORY begins with the sixteenth century. Every 
event of importance from this time is more or less connected with 
the great questions that agitate Christendom in our day. Following, 
as near as possible, the order of time, the narrative will take up (i) 
the rivalry of France, under Francis /., with Germany and Spain 
under Charles V. of Germany and I. of Spain ; (2) the Reformation ; 
(3) the decline of the Spanish monarchy under Philip II., &c.; (4) the 
growth of the power of France and of England ; (5) the Turkish 
power at its height under Solyman, and its subsequent decline j (6) 
the Thirty Years' War in Germany and Central Europe, with the brief 
predominance of Sweden ; (7) the aggressive policy and wars of 
Louis XIV. (the Great) of France, and the resistance offered by 
England, Germany, and Holland ; (8) the first appearance of Prussia 
and Russia in European politics ; after which the contemporary local 
histories, and the progress of maritime discovery. 

I. The Rivalry of France with Germany and Spain. 

2. The rivalry of France, under Francis I., with Germany and 
Spain under Charles V. of Germany, and I. of Spain, led the 
European nations to study the great question of the balance of power, 
so necessary to the smaller states. At this time, France under 
Francis, and Spain and Germany under Charles V,, were undoubtedly 
the two great powers of Europe. They were contemporary with the 
three greatest events affecting the interests of Christianity and of 



326 From Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 

civilisation : (i) The opening out of the Eastern world to the com- 
merce of Europe ; (2) the discovery of a new world, the continent 
of America, the most extensive of all fields for the settlement of 
a European population, the seed of future powerful Europeanised 
nationalities ; (3) the prevalence and force of new ideas, especially 
in the western and central nations of Europe, of which the Reforma- 
tion in religion, and resistance to the papal authority, temporal and 
spiritual, are the most palpable results. At the same time, Christian 
Europe was threatened by the Turkish power, which had already 
over-run Hungary and Transylvania, and had reached the frontiers 
of Germany, and which even threatened Italy and Rome itself. It 
was in the power of Charles and of Francis to save Germany and 
aly, and to recover Hungary and the territories south of the 
Danube from Turkish domination, and perhaps to re-establish a 
Christian government in Constantinople. But these men, respectable 
as they stood, fully equal to any of their contemporaries, could not 
see the grandeur of their position, and the path in which, unitedly, 
they might proceed with honour to themselves and with advantage 
to the highest interests of humanity. Paltry contests for a few 
square miles in Italy and the Low Countries made them rivals, 
insensible to all higher objects and claims. The opportunity of medi- 
ating in the great struggle of mind, of religious feeling, and of 
endangered secular interests, which followed the outbreak of the 
Reformation under Luther and his confreres in Germany, was thrown 
away. The guilt of the general intolerance of nations in the per- 
secutions for heresy, which stereotyped the embittered feelings of both 
Protestants and Catholics against each other, and which led at last 
to the religious wars in France, the Massacre on St. Bartholomew's 
Day, 1572 A.D., and, eventually, to the Thirty Years' calamitous War 
in Germany, 1618-1648 A.D., is fairly traceable to the selfish rivalry 
of Francis I. (who burned Protestants in France, and tried to league 
with them in Germany) and Charles V. These men, great as they 
were, had no "understanding of the times," to know and to 
recognise their high duties ; and Europe has had to suffer the con- 
sequences of their ignorance and selfishness. 

There were, however, causes of rivalry, which seemed to justify 
the course pursued by the French king and the German emperor. 
Neither France nor Germany were satisfied with the portions of 
the dukedom of Burgundy obtained by each on the death of Charles 
the Bold, 1477 A.D. France had also claims upon Naples and 
Sicily, disgracefully inherited from the House of Anjou. These 
states were now in the possession of Spain as the heritage of the 



EnglisJi Revolution, 1688 A.D. 327 

kings of Arragon, derived from the will of the murdered Conraddin. 
There was also another claim for the inheritance of the duchy of 
Milan, on the death of the last of the Visconti, 1447 A.D., which, by 
agreement, was to have fallen to the family of the Duke of Orleans, 
a descendant of the daughter of the first Visconti. It was, however, 
claimed as a fief of the empire, and had been granted to the Sforza 
family, 1494 A.D., by the Emperor Maximilian. Louis XII. had, 
for a time, recovered possession of Milan, but it had again reverted 
to the Sforzas. Francis I. renewed his claims, and, winning the 
battle of Marignano over the Swiss allies of Sforza, Sept. 13, 1515 
A.D., recovered Milan, a very distant and precarious possession for 
France. Again, the candidature for the empire on the death of 
Maximilian, 1519 A.D., on the part of Francis and Charles, resulted 
in the election of Charles. The two rivals, each anticipating the 
future contests, sought to secure the friendship of Henry VIII. 
of England, who then fancied himself arbiter of the peace of 
Europe. The military power which each could command was 
about equal. The emperor could claim superiority as to territory 
and varied resources. The King of France had a compact kingdom, 
unhampered by the necessity of consulting German diets and 
princes, who regarded themselves as practically the equals of the 
emperor. The possessions over which Charles ruled were Spain, 
Austria with Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, and the Tyrol : the duchies 
of Limburg, Gueldres, Alsace, with Brabant, and the Low Countries. 
He had also the nominal control of Bohemia, Lusatia, Silesia, and 
Moravia, w\\h Hungary and Transylvania; but the Turkish occupancy 
rendered these latter kingdoms a burden rather than a source of 
strength. In France all the great fiefs had been absorbed by the 
crown. England retained the town of Calais, the sole relic, 
happily, of her former large possessions, the inheritance of the Nor- 
man and Plantagenet kings. In the first war, Charles defeated 
Francis at Pavia and took him prisoner, 1525 A.D., but released him 
in 1526 A.D. ; in the second war, the Constable Bourbon, the rebel 
subject of Francis, serving under Charles, took Rome and held the 
Pope prisoner, 1527 A.D.; the third war lasted from 1536 to 1538 
A.D. ' 3 in the fourth war, 1542-1544 A.D., Francis, the orthodox per- 
secutor of Protestantism in France, scandalised Europe by allying 
himself with the Turkish Sultan Solyman, the sworn enemy of 
Christendom, though in so doing he only followed the example of 
Pope Alexander VI. (Borgia), in 1494 A.D. The balance of loss in 
these wars was unfavourable to Francis. Though released from 
prison in 1526 A.D., he had to pay a heavy ransom for his sons, 



328 From Charles V, of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 

given as hostages, and had to renounce all claims on Italy, 1529 A.DV 
In 1536 A.D., he renewed the war with Charles, having entered into 
a league with Sultan Solyman, by which the sultan engaged that the 
pirate Barbarossa should land a Turkish army in Apulia, for the 
conquest of Naples, while Francis invaded Lombardy. By Bar- 
barossa 10,000 persons were carried into slavery from Apulia, after 
which he retired. Peace was made in 1538 A.D. Francis died in 
1544 A.D. Henry VI IL, the supposed arbiter, died in 1547 A.D. ; 
and Charles (after abdicating) in 1558 A.D. 

IL The Reformation. 

3. "There is, perhaps, no event in history which has been repre- 
sented in so great a variety of lights as the Reformation. It has 
been called a revolt of the laity against the clergy, or of the Teutonic 
races against the Italians, or the kingdoms of Europe against the 
universal monarchy of the popes. Some have seen in it only a burst 
of long-repressed anger at the luxury of the prelates and the mani- 
fold abuses of the ecclesiastical system. Others, a renewal of the 
youth of the Church, by a return to primitive forms of doctrine. 
All these, indeed, to some extent, it was ; but it was also some- 
thing more profound, and fraught with mightier consequences than 
any of them. It was, in its essence, the assertion of the principle of 

individuality that is to say, of true spiritual freedom That 

which was external and concrete was, in all things, to be superseded 

by that which was inward and spiritual Truth was no longer to 

be truth to the soul until it should have been by the soul recognised r 
and, in some measure, even created." J " This great work was 
accomplished .... only by the invisible power of ideas and truths^ 
facilitated by circumstances which Providence had prepared, and by 
the energetic genius of some few men who made themselves masters 
of these ideas and circumstances. Thus .... the great law of 
nature was fulfilled, according to which ideas are stronger than 
external power, and according to which excess and abuse of 
authority becomes its destruction, and according to which every 
power that resists the spirit of the time rests upon a hollow founda- 
tion, and accelerates its fall by its resistance." A long-prevailing 
unconcealed jealousy of the wealth of the Church influenced many 
who cared nothing about the teachings or superstitions of the Church- 
Even good Catholics, who, as in England, zealously approved of the 

1 Bryce, p. 325. 



English Revolution, 1688 A.D. 329 

burning of heretics, at the same time, 1410 A.D., offered to aid 
Henry IV. in secularising the whole of the ecclesiastic property of the 
kingdom. The sale of indulgences by papal agents had long been 
annoying to the moral feeling of sincere Catholics, especially when 
carried on by persons of questionable character. There had been gradu- 
ally growing up a feeling in favour of the reconsideration of certain 
views which had deformed the simplicity of the Catholic creed, and 
which did not accord with the writings of the early Fathers. Thus., 
"the Reformation was not, as is commonly supposed, an improvised 
revolution, for which men had not been prepared." x The train had 
been long preparing, and long laying, when the action of MARTIN 
LUTHER caused the explosion. The pious, simple monk, excited by 
the vile trade carried on by Tetzel in the disposal of indulgences,, 
believed that the Pope had been deceived by his agents, and that, in 
protesting against the sale of indulgences, he was serving the interests 
of the Church of Rome. In 1517 A.D. he published his ninety-five 
propositions against indulgences at Wittenberg. In 1521 A.D. they 
were formally condemned by the Council at Worms. Political 
reasons, as well as his educational influences, led the Emperor 
Charles V. to support the papacy, and the same reasons influenced 
the ruling powers of Europe. The cause of reform was injured by 
the revolt of the German peasantry, in 1525 A.D., which was ascribed 
to the teachings of Luther, though the existence of political secret 
societies of the peasantry, for some generations previous, is a fact fully 
established by the German historians. This revolt was most cruelly 
stamped out, revealing at the same time the oppression under which 
the rebels groaned, and the thorough unfitness of their leaders to 
establish any practical reforms. At the Diet of Spires, 1526-1529, 
all further reforms in the Church were prohibited. The opposite 
party protested against this decision, and hence acquired the name of 
Protestants. In the Diet of Augsburg, 1530 A.D., the Protestants 
produced their confession of faith, which was condemned, and all 
attempts at a reconciliation failed. Protestantism then necessarily 
assumed a political character. By the formation of the League of 
Schmalkaldm, consisting of the Protestant princes, 1531 A.D., the 
emperor was compelled to conclude the Peace of Nuremburg, 1532 
A.D. In 1546 A.D., through the defection of Prince Maurice, the 
League was defeated at Muhlberg, and the cause of Protestantism, 
as a political power in the empire, appeared to be lost ; but, in 
1552 A.D., Maurice, suspecting the emperor's intention of enforcing 

1 Hook, vol. i., new series, p. 24. 



33O From Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 

the decisions of the Council of Trent (then in session), suddenly 
advanced against Charles, and compelled him to fly from Innsptuck, 
after which the Treaty of Passau was agreed to, by which a general 
toleration was established. This was followed by the religious Peace 
of Augsburg, which, for a time, gave religious freedom to Germany. 
In the course of the Schmalkalden War, Henry IT., king of France, 
"the eldest son of the Church," leagued with the Protestant princes, 
tookMetz, Toul,z.n& Verdun, and proclaimed himself " the protector of 
the liberties of Germany," thus beginning a policy of aggression from 
which both Germany and France have so greatly suffered. THE 
CAUSE OF THE REFORMATION prospered in NORTH GERMANY, and, 
for a time, even in AUSTRIA. It was established in SCANDINAVIA, 
part of SWITZERLAND, the SEVEN UNITED PROVINCES. ENGLAND 
began its religious reform under Henry VIII. and Edward VI. 
Mary was a papist and persecutor, and unwittingly helped Protest- 
antism by the hateful impression she made by the fires of Smithfield, 
in which at least 288 persons suffered death during her reign. Under 
Elizabeth, Protestantism was firmly established. In SCOTLAND, also, 
Protestantism was deeply rooted into the national character. The 
" Solemn League and Covenant," so remarkable in Scottish history, 
proved that the reformer, John Knox, had left his stamp on the 
Scottish mind. In FRANCE, up to the death of Henry III., Protest- 
antism was alternately tolerated and persecuted. The Catholic 
League under the Guises, supported by Spain, for the destruction of 
heresy in France, was accompanied by a secret league for the extir- 
pation of Protestantism by Spain and France, 1585 A.D. Before 
this, the massacre in Paris on St. Bartholomew's Day, 1572 A.D., 
had disgusted all Europe, except Pope Gregory XIII. and Philip II. 
of Spain. The accession of Henry IV., in 1589 A.D., and the publi- 
cation of the Edict of Nantes, 1598 A.D., gave Protestantism a legal 
existence and security in France. In SPAIN, PORTUGAL, and ITALY, 
in the SOUTHERN NETHERLANDS, Protestantism was ruthlessly 
stamped out. The whole process may be profitably read in McCrie's 
history, and in Prescott and Motley. The Inquisition did its work 
thoroughly ; and Alva, on a larger scale, put to death, by the hands 
of the executioner, eighteen thousand Protestants in the Netherlands, 
within the space of six years, with the full approval of his master, 
Philip II. of Spain. In POLAND, Protestantism obtained, through 
the labours of John A. Lasko, some considerable success from 1552 
to 1570 A.D., and following years, until the introduction of the 
Socinian element alarmed the orthodox feeling of both Catholics 
and Protestants. The Socinians were banished, 1658 A.D., but the 



English Revolution, 1688 A. D, 331 

reproach of their views affected the progress of the Protestants gener- 
ally. In IRELAND, the Keltic population, which hated the English 
when Catholic, hated them in their Protestantism the more. 

4. The rapid progress of Protestantism was followed by an equally 
rapid reaction in certain countries. This has been clearly and 
eloquently described by Macaulay. " In the northern parts of 
Europe the victory of Protestantism was rapid and decisive. The 
dominion of the Papacy was felt by the nations of Teutonic blood, 
as the dominion of Italians, of foreigners, of men who were aliens 
in language, manners, and intellectual constitution. The large 
jurisdiction exercised by the spiritual tribunals of Rome seemed 
to be a degrading badge of servitude. The sums which, under 
a thousand pretexts, were exacted by a distant court, were regarded 
both as a humiliating and as a ruinous tribute. The character 
of that court excited the scorn and disgust of a grave, earnest, 
sincere, and devout people. The new theology spread with a 
rapidity never known before. All ranks, all varieties of character 
joined the ranks of the innovators. Sovereigns impatient to appro- 
priate to themselves the prerogatives of the Pope; nobles desirous 
to have the plunder of abbeys ; suitors exasperated by the extor- 
tions of the foreign camera ; patriots impatient of a foreign rule ; 
good men scandalised by the corruption of the Church ; bad men 
desirous of the licence inseparable from great moral revolutions; 
wise men eager in the pursuit of truth ; weak men allured by the 

glitter of novelty : all were found on one side Within fifty 

years from the day on which Luther publicly renounced com- 
munion with the Papacy, and burned the bull of Leo before the 
gates of Wittenberg, Protestantism attained its highest ascendancy, 

which it soon lost, and which it has never regained In 

England, Scotland, Denmark, Sweden, Livonia, Prussia, Saxony, 
Hesse, Wurtemburg, the Palatinate, in several Cantons of Switzer- 
land, in the Northern Netherlands, the Reformation had completely 
triumphed ; and in all the other countries on this side of the Alps 
and the Pyrenees it seemed on the point of triumphing. But, while 
this mighty work was proceeding in the north of Europe, a revolu- 
tion of a very different kind had taken place in the south. The 
temper of Italy and Spain was widely different from that of 

Germany and England The national feeling of the Italians 

impelled them to resist any change which might deprive their 
country of the honours and advantages which she enjoyed as the 

seat of the government of the Universal Church There was 

among the Italians both much piety and much impiety ; but, with 



332 From Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 



very few exceptions, neither the i^ety nor the impiety took the turn 
of Protestantism. The religious Italians desired a reform of morals 
and discipline, but not a reform of doctrine, and least of all a schism. 
The irreligious Italians simply disbelieved Christianity without 
hating it ..... Neither the spirit of Savonarola, nor the spirit of 
Machiavelli had anything in common with the spirit of the religious 
or political Protestants of the north. Spain, again, was with respect 
to the Catholic Church in a situation very different from that of the 
Teutonic nations ..... The attachment of the Castilian to the 
faith of his ancestors was peculiarly strong and ardent. With that 
faith were inseparably bound up the institutions, the independence, 
and the glory of his country ..... The existence of Spain had 
been one long crusade. After fighting Mussulmans in the old world, 
she began to fight heathens in the new ..... It was with the cry 
of 'St. James for Spain,' that they charged armies which out- 
numbered them a hundredfold ..... Thus Catholicism, which in the 
public mind of northern Europe was associated with spoliation and 
oppression, was in the public mind of Spain associated with liberty, 
yictory, dominion, wealth, and glory. It is not, therefore, strange 
that the effect of the great outbreak of Protestantism in one part of 
Christendom should have been to produce an equally violent out- 
break of Catholic zeal on the other." 1 .... " About half a century 
after the great separation there were throughout the north Protestant 
governments and Protestant nations. In the south were governments 
and nations actuated by the most intense zeal for the ancient 
Church. Between these two hostile regions lay, morally, as well as 
geographically, a great debatable land. In France, Belgium, South 
Germany, Hungary, and Poland, the contest was still undecided. 
The governments of those countries had not renounced their con- 
nexion with Rome, but the Protestants were numerous, bold, and 
active. In France they formed a commonwealth within the realm, 
held fortresses, were able to bring great armies into the field, and 
had treated with their sovereign on terms of equality. In Poland 
the king was still a Catholic ; but the Protestants had the upper 
hand in the diet, filled the chief offices in the administration, and 
in the large towns took possession of the parish church ..... 
In Bavaria the state of things was nearly the same ..... In 
Transylvania the house of Austria was unable to prevent the diet 
from confiscating, by one sweeping decree, the estates of the Church. 
In Austria proper, it was generally said that only one-thirtieth part 
* 

1 "Essays," vol. ii. pp. 551-554. 



English Revolution, 1688 A.D. 333 

of the population could be counted on as good Catholics. In 
Belgium the adherents to the new opinions were reckoned by 
hundreds of thousands. The history of the two succeeding genera- 
tions is the history of the struggle between Protestant possessions of 
the north of Europe, and Catholicism possessed of the south for 

the doubtful territory which lay between At first the chances 

seemed to be decidedly in favour of Protestantism, but the victory 
remained with the Church of Rome. On every point she was 
successful. If we overleap another half century, we find her 
victorious and dominant in France, Belgium, Bavaria, Bohemia, 
Austria, Poland, and Hungary. Nor has Protestantism in the course 
of two hundred years, been able to reconquer any portion of what 
was then lost." * This eloquent summary of the popish reaction, 
though substantially true, must be taken with some qualification, as 
will be seen in the course of events following. Macaulay has 
neglected to state the main cause of the reaction against Protest- 
antism on the Continent, in France, South Germany and Austria, 
Hungary and Poland. This was the selfish secularity of the major 
part of the Protestant nobles and higher classes, whose zeal was too 
much the desire to acquire possession of Church property, to rule 
over the reformed Churches, and to establish a power in their several 
states necessarily opposed to the control of their respective govern- 
ments. The greed, and tyranny, and intolerance of these men lost 
them the sympathy and support of the people. Gardiner justly 
remarks, in reference to the events which led to the revolt in 
Bohemia in 162 1 A.D., what is true in respect to Germany and France: 
" The dispassionate inquirer, however badly he may think of the 
religious systems by which Protestantism was superseded in these 
territories, can hardly do otherwise than rejoice at the defeat of the 
political system of the men by whom Protestantism was in the main 
supported.' We may trace the decline of spiritual religion in 
North-Western Germany to the thorough subjection of the churches 
to the secular power, by which all freedom of thought in religious 
matters was suppressed. This great evil was felt by the reformer 
himself when he and Melancthon were betrayed into the great sin 
of authorising the Landgrave of Hesse to take a second wife while 
his first was living ; a painful fact, which in all fairness cannot be 
concealed. 

"Essays," vol. i. pp. 561-563. 
s Gardiner, "History of England," vol. iii. p. 263. 



334 From Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 

HI. The Decline of the Spanish Monarchy under Philip //., and 

his Successors. 

5. By the abdication of the Emperor Charles V., the kingdom ot 
Spain, the Netherlands, Milan, Naples, Sicily, and the recent con- 
quests in America came into the possession of his son, Philip II. 
The seventeen provinces (the Netherlands), though small in extent 
of territory, were the richest of the possessions of the Spanish 
crown. They comprised three hundred and fifty cities, six thousand 
three hundred towns, besides numerous villages. In agriculture, 
manufacture, and commerce, they were unequalled, as well as in 
wealth, by any kingdom then existing. They were, in fact, the 
main support of Charles V., and, for a time, of his son Philip II. 
Each province was a separate state, with separate constitutions and 
laws. The states-general, consisting of deputies from each province, 
met occasionally; there were states in each province elected as 
representative of the people by different processes, and a supreme 
tribunal at Mechlin. The King of Spain was in reality the head of 
a republican confederation, the people of which were perhaps the 
best educated in Europe, and all of them highly attached to their 
laws and political constitutions. The possessions of the Austrian 
family in Germany, with Bohemia and Hungary, and the imperial 
crown, fell to Ferdinand I., the younger brother of Charles V. 
Philip II. possessed much of his father's talent and prudence, with 
all or more of his conscientious bigotry; his attention to public 
affairs intense and without intermission. His revenue was equal to 
that of all the other sovereigns of Europe combined. His army 
consisted of two hundred and eighty thousand men ; he died in 
debt one hundred and forty millions of ducats. PORTUGAL, by 
the failure of the royal line, became united to Spain, 1580 A.D. 
By the fierce persecution of Protestantism in the NETHERLANDS, 
the SEVEN UNITED PROVINCES revolted under the Prince of Orange, 
1568 A.D., and secured their independence. The remaining 
southern provinces remained under Spain, being intensely Catholic. 
In the persecution carried on by the Duke of Alva, some eighteen 
thousand persons suffered by the hands of the executioner; fifty 
thousand in all were destroyed, and large numbers emigrated, 
carrying with them their manufacturing skill, into England especially. 
In the administration of his Italian dominions, the troops of Philip 
relieved Malta when nearly captured by the Turks, 1565 A.D., and on 
7th October, 1571 A.D., the fleets of Spain, Venice, and Rome, com- 
manded by Don Juan, of Austria, defeated the Turkish fleet at 



English Revolution, 1688 A.D, 335 

Lepanto. Thirty thousand of the Turks were killed, ten thousand 
made prisoners, and four-fifths of their ships destroyed ; but this 
victory was not followed up, and produced no practical results. In 
his war with FRANCE, Philip gained the battle of St. Quentin, 
1556, and then concluded peace. In the subsequent civil wars in 
France, Philip supported the Catholic League and the Guises, and 
kept up the disorders which continued until the accession ot 
Henry IV. In ENGLAND Philip's marriage with Queen Mary led 
her to make war with France, in which Calais was happily lost, 
1558 A.D. The grand Armada (one hundred and thirty ships, three 
thousand sailors, and twenty thousand troops sent out from Spain 
for the conquest of England) was defeated by the navy of Elizabeth. 
Thirty-two of the largest ships were destroyed, and one-half of the 
troops. An attempt on Ireland in 1596 A.D. was equally unfortunate. 
In SPAIN the Morriscos (the Moorish people) revolted, 1568 A.D., 
in consequence of attempts to modify their national usages ; they, 
throwing off their profession of Christianity, massacred the priests, 
&c., but were finally subdued, 1570 A.D. Don Carlos, the eldest 
son of Philip, undoubtedly insane, died, 1568 A.D. Philip was 
succeeded by his son, Philip ///., 1598 A.D., of whom and his 
immediate successors little can be recalled beyond the reign of 
worthless favourites, the profligacy of courts, and the weakness of 
the government. " This singular race of submissive penitents, warm 
husbands, and mighty hunters, were all hypochondriacal, lethargic, 
and superstitious ; incapable of business, exerting no energy except 
in bigotry ; no activity but in the chase, and no sensibility but in 
that passion for their wives, which was not of the most refined 
sort. They submitted to any minister who saved them the trouble 
.of government, and whom their consorts suffered or patronised. 
The Queen, the confessor, and the huntsman were the only 
important persons in the eyes of a Spanish monarch." 1 In 
1609 the Moors, estimated at the improbable number of six 
hundred thousand in number, were expelled, partly owing to their 
frequent rebellions and concealed alliances with their African 
friends. The loss of so much valuable labour was perhaps made 
up by the peace thus secured to the population generally. These 
Moors were in Africa treated with " characteristic inhumanity by 
the most cruel and perfidious people on earth." 2 The Duke of 
Lerma,and Rodrigo CalderojWere the favourites in this reign ; but the 
duke was disgraced i6i8A.D., andin 1621 A.D.Calderon was executed. 

1 Edinburgh Review, vol. xxxi. 

8 Durham, "History of Spain," vol. v. p. 88. 



336 From Charles V. of Germany, 1520 A.D., to the 

Philip IV. succeeded, 1624 A.D. ; his reign is the most disastrous 
in the annals of Spain. Portugal, in 1640 A.D., asserted its inde- 
pendence under the Duke of Braganza. In 1609 A.D., Spain had 
virtually admitted the independence of the Seven United Provinces. 
The insurrection of the Catalans led to a war with France, in which 
Spain had to cede Rousillon and Conflans to France, 1660 A.D., 
and the privileges of the Catalans confirmed. Naples was troubled 
by the revolt of the fisherman Massaniello, which ended in a few 
months, 1646 A.D. The Comte de Olivarez was the ruling minister 
in this reign. Philip IV. was succeeded, in 1665 A.D., by a child four 
years old, Charles II. Don Juan, of Austria, acted as Regent 
from 1677, and died 1680 A.D. The imbecility and fatuity of the 
king lowered the monarchy in the opinion of all Europe, and the 
succession after his death was the topic most interesting to all 
politicians. The ruin of the commercial prosperity of Spain began 
with Charles V., the Emperor, not only though his exhausting wars 
and those of his successors, but by his ignorance and neglect of the 
true principles of political economy. In 1552 the export of cloth, 
spun and combed wool, corn, cattle, leather, and manufactures of 
silk were forbidden ! Heavy duties were levied on the exportation 
of Spanish produce, as well as on imported goods. In 1594 A.D., 
the Cortes complained that taxation was equal to the value of one- 
third of the capital of the trader. Such was the scarcity of money, 
through the wars in France, Germany, and Italy, that even Charles V. 
had to tamper with the currency, and his successors followed his 
example. Gradually, but rapidly, the agriculture and manufacture 
of Spain declined. The trading classes and the cultivators of the 
ground were despised, and most of the handicraft trades and the 
commercial transactions were in the hands of foreigners, of whom, 
in 1 6 10 A.D., one hundred and sixty thousand were settled in 
Castile, while the population of some districts had decreased one- 
half between 1600 A.D. and 1619 A.D. The general distress was 
great, and the commerce of the Mediterranean was lost through the 
predominance of the Barbary pirates. Spain, in 1594 A.D., had 
eight million two hundred thousand inhabitants, while at that time 
the whole of England, Scotland, and Ireland had barely four 
millions. The civic list of Philip II. was ^2,400,000. He left a debt 
of one hundred millions sterling, borrowed at high interest. There 
was in this sixteenth century a rapid decline in the population of the 
towns. Under Charles II., who died 1708 A.D., the population of 
Spain had fallen to six millions. 



English Revolution, 1688 A.D. 337 

IV. The Growth of thi Power of France and of England : 
neighbours and antagonistic in their policies. 

6. FRANCE. The reigns of Henry //., Francis 77. , Charles IX., 
and of Henry III. were injurious to France, characterised by 
religious persecutions and civil war. The massacre of the Pro- 
testants -in Paris and other towns on St. Bartholomew's Day, August 
24, 1572 A.D., had thoroughly alienated the Protestants from the 
governing power under the influence of Catherine di Medici, whi